Support NeoGAF

[Herb Alpert]

Ho fuck it. I tried to write a ironic post on how the second hand market has been jeopardizing all the industry during the last 25 years but I don't find any good idea.

Let's just say that the industry is becoming more and more greedy. it's happening the exact same shit as it happened in Hollywood. Disgusting.

 

[Neuromancer]

All these companies don't like it, what's stopping EA, Activision, and others from banding together to become their own reseller of games?

Look how many used game or rental chains either went out of business or were acquired. It's the videogame industry's fault they never went in on this years ago. They could have purchased EB Games or KB Toys or one of the dozens of failed chains and made it into their own reseller and got a cut of the pie.

I honestly wonder why they don't do this.

 

[Azull]

They should be worried about releasing their games buggy. That would probably help.

 

[LuchaShaq]

The BIGGEST reason I bought Skyrim NEW was because it DID NOT have massive pre order/online pass bullshit.

If they add it for their next game? Won't buy until it's 10$ used.

Skyrim is one of the few games I didn't sell when I was done! Why? They are one of about three developers with a large track record of good DLC/expansions.

 

[GoofsterStud]

In an ideal world, those who buy the game new would get all the content (DLC, Multi-player, etc.) at no extra cost.

Those who buy used would have to pay for all that. So the developer sees some profit too.

LOL

Why do that when you can add game cards, then everyone can pay!

 

[Dusk Golem]

A responsible answer. I understand why it is trouble for developers, especially with rising development cost, but used games are also invaluable to the market for gamers I believe as an option. The only real solution I can think of is giving part of the used fee back to the company, but there are arguable points against that.

Is this the only industry that obsesses about the used market? No one ever complains about used books.

To be fair, it costs FAR more money to make a game that it does to make a book.

 

[The_Hitcher89]

What.

They essentially conned PS3 owners into buying a broken product, with the help of shitty games media

 

[inky]

I honestly wonder why they don't do this.

Because they don't want to deal with the hassle of maintaining retail locations, and the risks associated with that. They just see Gamestop is a billion dollar business and want in because, "fuck, it's our gaems".

 

[GavinGT]

Doesn't bugginess just come with the territory when making games of such enormous scope? Are there examples of similar games that were released without that "open world jank"?

And I'm not trying to excuse Skyrim PS3 here, because that was obviously a mess on a whole other level. I'm just referring to the typical Bethesda jankiness.

 

[Azull]

Don't bugginess just come with the territory when making games of such enormous scope? Are there examples of similar games that were released without that "open world jank"?

Not on the level of Skyrim on the PS3. That was a disaster.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The easiest way to devalue the used market is to reduce the price of new product.

Perhaps the reason why this hasn't been done is because the price point is optimal for companies to make the most money, and they know this. And it's not like games stay at $60 for that long, but those who do pay that much are reeled in through preorder incentives and day-one DLC. By offering the game piecemeal they can spread out content and get more money for less work, but also increase the perceived value of purchasing early.

The alternative is lowering budgets, and that requires AAA developers to overhaul the way they make games to be profitable without requiring million and millions of sales. It's easier to rail against the used game market than it is to wake up and stop chasing the COD money.

 

[Deified Data]

They essentially conned PS3 owners into buying a broken product, with the help of shitty games media

PS3 Skyrim sucked, I agree and experienced it first hand. The majority of the issues were fixed with the first patch.

 

[Clevinger]

Are people even reading what he said, or just the title? It's pretty reasonable for a used games answer.

 

[GavinGT]

Not on the level of Skyrim on the PS3. That was a disaster.

Please refer to my edit.

 

[Azull]

Please refer to my edit.

Fair enough

 

[ido]

This line of reasoning is seriously strange to me. Why should the developers receive money on a resell?

I cannot think of any other product that works like this. If I buy a DVD, and then want to resell it, why should anyone get paid -again- for the same physical product?

 

[Mononoke]

Why doesnt someone on the publisher/dev end create a store for trade ins where the publisher/devs are getting the cut?

So you know, compete with the trade in market.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Are people even reading what he said, or just the title? It's pretty reasonable for a used games answer.

Right, he's saying used is a concern, and they're trying to put in all those things that make their games more attractive for people. He's not saying anything about stopping used games or anything.

Sheesh people.

 

[Petrae]

Just implement activation codes. Enough with the whining over being "out of the loop" when it comes to used games revenue. One code included with new game for activation; each additional console requires a code for $10.

Granted, consumers won't like it, but since publishers can't figure out a way to be "in the loop" without inconveniencing their customers, just do this and get it over with.

Amazing how this industry has survived for more than three decades despite the used game market, and now it's suddenly public enemy #1.

 

[GavinGT]

This line of reasoning is seriously strange to me. Why should the developers receive money on a resell?

I cannot think of any other product that works like this. If I buy a DVD, and then want to resell it, why should anyone get paid -again- for the same physical product?

Pretty much all PC software bars you from reselling it, at least ever since the advent of CD keys.

 

[Rhindle]

Is this the only industry that obsesses about the used market? No one ever complains about used books.

It's the only industry where the biggest retail outlet makes most of its money off used sales. So yes.

 

[Muchi Muchi Pink]

To be fair, it costs FAR more money to make a game that it does to make a book.

I can buy used blu-ray movies. No one complained, yet.

 

[GavinGT]

 

 

[Neuromancer]

Because they don't want to deal with the hassle of maintaining retail locations, and the risks associated with that. They just see Gamestop is a billion dollar business and want in because, "fuck, it's our gaems".

People could mail them in or something

It'd be like reverse Gamefly kind of

 

[JABEE]

PS3 Skyrim sucked, I agree and experienced it first hand. The majority of the issues were fixed with the first patch.

5 months after the game was released.

 

[Neff]

Not sure if serious.

A)If I am buying something at 25€ that I have not bought for 60€, even though I could have, it might mean I would in fact not have bought it at 60€ -- because I demonstrably haven't

B)If I can sell a thing I have paid 25€ for, and no longer use, to someone else, for 20€, I will. It's worth doing.

Point being, "full price" is way too damn high. Look at books. Entertainment books are cheap. Which also makes their resale value low, to the point where it's not worth the time and hassle of a resale, printing labels, restocking your envelopes, paying postage, dealing with returns etc.

The easiest way to devalue the used market is to reduce the price of new product.

It's fully hypothetical to debate potential losses and assumed purchases. What isn't hypothetical, and is in fact very real, is that people are paying money for games via a business model where a fraction of that money goes back to the people who made it. That initial retail purchase floats with the product as it changes hands, decreases in value, and kills knock-on replenishment from suppliers.

I thought games twenty years ago, with less content, costing twice what they do now (and that's discounting inflation), were worth it, because I really love games. I keep them, I replay them. I'm not rich and I never have been.

 

[Schnozberry]

The fatal conceit of these game developers and publishers is assuming that if lower cost used copies weren't available, people would buy more full priced games, and that isn't the case at all. In fact, in an environment where sequelitis is at epidemic levels, these developers and publishers benefit because gamers who buy used games that are a few months or years old and love them may be motivated enough to buy a full priced sequel day one down the road.

They are also attempting to corner a market in a way that no other product enjoys, which is somehow gleaning a profit off of second hand sales. They could probably pull it off technologically, but in the end what they are telling us is that we don't in fact own the games we purchase. We merely purchase a license to play something as long as we meet certain arbitrary criteria that they determine based on their own whimsies. I'm sure it has to do with some perverted industry view on intellectual property, but if they follow this path to it's logical conclusion they will end up shrinking their own market, possibly drastically.

 

[Rhindle]

I can buy used blu-ray movies. No one complained, yet.

Used sales don't impact box office, cable, pay TV, broadcast or other revenues sources. And they're a much smaller percentage of recorded media sales compared to games.

 

[Zephyrus]

Rich coming from a developer who I assume don't even pay game testers...

 

[SouthernDragon]

Somehow Hollywood has managed to survive the used goods market.

As has every other media form.

And physical goods industry.

 

[GavinGT]

Used sales don't impact box office, cable, pay TV, broadcast or other revenues sources. And they're a much smaller percentage of recorded media sales compared to games.

Yeah, if these revenue streams start drying up, I think we could be facing the same situation with physical copies of movies (if they're still even a thing by that point).

 

[Deified Data]

5 months after the game was released.

1.2 dropped on November 28th.

 

[Tobor]

Is this the only industry that obsesses about the used market? No one ever complains about used books.

Wrong. In fact, before the ebook revolution, the publishing industry was starting to worry about used sales.

''We think it's not good for the industry and it has an effect, but we can't measure it,'' said Paul Aiken, executive director of the Authors Guild, a trade group. ''There has always been used-book sales, but it's always been a background noise sort of thing. Now it's right there next to the new book on Amazon.''

Ironically, a remarkably similar complaint to pubs and devs complaints about Gamestop. Of course, this article is from 2004, and Publishers, while they still have plenty to worry about, aren't worried about used sales anymore. Digital distribution has killed the issue, just like it will for the games industry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/12/b...r-used-books-publishing-industry-s-fears.html

 

[faceless007]

Pretty much all PC software bars you from reselling it, at least ever since the advent of CD keys.

They might say they do, but it's still entirely legal to do so and I've bought and sold used PC software. (Unless by CD keys you meant activation keys, which are one-time-use only.)

 

[Rhindle]

The fatal conceit of these game developers and publishers is assuming that if lower cost used copies weren't available, people would buy more full priced games, and that isn't the case at all. In fact, in an environment where sequelitis is at epidemic levels, these developers and publishers benefit because gamers who buy used games that are a few months or years old and love them may be motivated enough to buy a full priced sequel day one down the road.

I'm pretty sure publishers are not just making random assumptions and have some analytical data to back up the conclusion that used sales, on balance, hurt industry revenues.

Under your theory, publishers should just give away copies of new games for free, because that apparently that's the best way to advertise future sequels.

 

[GavinGT]

They might say they do, but it's still entirely legal to do so and I've bought and sold used PC software. (Unless by CD keys you meant activation keys, which are one-time-use only.)

I guess I am referring to activation keys.

 

[Atomski]

Exactly, I bought a used car two years ago for about 6 grand, but could not in good conscious drive it around until I saved up 3 more grand and sent it to Chrysler.

I love how people keep using these bad examples. When parts break down on that car guess who is making bank on the replacements?

Car makers still make money on used vehicles.

 

[ElfArmy177]

Wtf is with the garbage "what 10 million isn't enough"?? Its their damn game and they should get paid to make it. Anything that removes sales from them should concern them!

Man, people can be so bitter towards anything that generates money for someone other than themselves.

Edit: I wasn't referring to the OP, I was referring to the other random comments.

 

[Mavromatis]

Man, people can be so bitter towards anything that generates money for someone other than themselves.

I can see that but it doesn't just generate money, it is our money to begin with. So people should care about themselves too. All that, developers have family to feed arguments somehow tries to ignore that gamers need the money too.

 

[genjiZERO]

1.2 dropped on November 28th.

It didn't help me. I couldn't play more than a half hour before the game would crash and die. Once the patch that actually was supposed to fix things came out I had already moved on. I'll never buy another Bethesda product because of it.

 

[ElfArmy177]

I can see that but it doesn't just generate money, it is our money to begin with. So people should care about themselves too. All that, developers have family to feed arguments somehow tries to ignore that gamers need the money too.

Understandable, but its their game, they made it, they designed it, and it costs alot of money to make it. Just because something sells better than it was going to, doesnt mean they dont "deserve" sales anymore...

There isnt a cut off that says "you X amount of dollars, so now we need to think about the gamers and give it to them for a lower cost." That doesn't make sense. You cant rent the full game of minecraft, or get it used, but noone is complaining that Notch made enough money off it to be satisfied.

 

[Schnozberry]

I'm pretty sure publishers are not just making random assumptions and have some analytical data to back up the conclusion that used sales, on balance, hurt industry revenues.

Under your theory, publishers should just give away copies of new games for free, because that apparently that's the best way to advertise future sequels.

I would love to see the industry data that proves their case. If you know of any, please link.

To your second point, that's not what I'm suggesting at all. What I'm saying is that if I can pick up the original Uncharted for $15 at Gamestop, I might love it enough to go out and play through the entire series, and might pick up future sequels at full price.

The more people playing games means the more people brought into the gaming fold to play future games. Buying a used Honda or Ford vehicle might make me love it enough that when I'm ready to buy a new car, I'll look to them first. If Ford decided to make the keys for their vehicle biometric, and when the vehicle changed hands I needed to mail them 10% of the sale value in order to switch the key over to the new owner, I wouldn't consider buying any product of theirs ever again.

 

[GavinGT]

Digital distribution has killed the issue, just like it will for the games industry.

Shouldn't the people in here be equally up in arms about digital distribution? I don't hear anyone complaining about Steam or iTunes.

a used Honda or Ford vehicle might make me love it enough that when I'm ready to buy a new car, I'll look to them first. If Ford decided to make the keys for their vehicle biometric, and when the vehicle changed hands I needed to mail them 10% of the sale value in order to switch the key over to the new owner, I wouldn't consider buying any product of theirs ever again.

I don't think the car comparison is totally fair. Cars are used for years and they inevitably degrade, regardless of the owner, and new ones need to be purchased. Hence, I don't see why a car company should care if you resell your car. Games are different because, in most cases, you play it for like 10 hours and you're done with it. And as long as you haven't scratched it up to the point it won't read, you can sell it to someone else and they'll have an experience that's basically indistinguishable from purchasing it new. Obviously it's more nuanced than that, but I don't think it's the exact same situation as with games.

 

[i-Lo]

Shouldn't the people in here be equally up in arms about digital distribution? I don't hear anyone complaining about Steam or iTunes.

I think it's because the technology started out the way it did, i.e. inability to resell. That's why it's so ingrained in us.

 

[DR2K]

This way no one can sell their broken copy.

 

[Schnozberry]

Shouldn't the people in here be equally up in arms about digital distribution? I don't hear anyone complaining about Steam or iTunes.

Perhaps, but we all waived the right to complain when we agreed to the terms and conditions of purchases from digital storefronts.

 

[ElfArmy177]

I think it's because the technology started out the way it did, i.e. inability to resell. That's why it's so ingrained in us.

Cant wait for everything to just go digital. One less argument for everyone to flail their arms about. Jesus, people drop sometimes 20 dollars a day on FAST FOOD and they turn around and complain about the cost of videogames.

Hell, I got a buddy that would spend hundreds on weed, and then bitch because "World of Warcraft costs too much, so Im going to private server the game" What the fuck? Why is it that videogames seem so expensive to everyone that spends a shit ton more on other things? Is it because its digital?

 

[Deified Data]

It didn't help me. I couldn't play more than a half hour before the game would crash and die. Once the patch that actually was supposed to fix things came out I had already moved on. I'll never buy another Bethesda product because of it.

I guess that's the true tragedy of Skyrim PS3 - no one really had the same experience. I know people who could play the game forever unpatched, which boggles the mind. In my case the game became playable after 1.2, but I suppose it wouldn't be the same for everyone. I got hit so hard with late-game lag that any relief was welcome and appreciated.

 

[GavinGT]

I think it's because the technology started out the way it did, i.e. inability to resell. That's why it's so ingrained in us.

Right. People are upset because they like the status quo with regards to the used game market and they don't want it to change. There's a feeling of entitlement on the consumer side, too.

 

[Schnozberry]

I don't think the car comparison is totally fair. Cars are used for years and they inevitably degrade, regardless of the owner, and new ones need to be purchased. Hence, I don't see why a car company should care if you resell your car. Games are different because, in most cases, you play it for like 10 hours and you're done with it. And as long as you haven't scratched it up to the point it won't read, you can sell it to someone else and they'll have an experience that's basically indistinguishable from purchasing it new.

I was trying to think of another entity that could potentially technologically come up with a way to prevent you from selling a product you own, and that's what I came up with. It's probably not apples to apples perfectly.

I think the larger question is, do we own the games we purchase, or are we purchasing a revocable license to the experience of playing the game? I think it's the distinction that decides the argument. If game companies are arguing the latter, then it's a sea change in the way consumers will view games. Game publishers should be expected at that point to develop a different model for users to experience games. Perhaps digital rentals by the hour or day.