End of used games. For or Against?

[Yuni]

Gamestop touched on this a little bit. A lot of their profit comes from buying and selling used games, so something like this could potentially put them out of business.

I don't want to buy my games at Best Buy. :/

[Thage]

Fuck people are dumb... Why would you not give money to those that made the game? People just want free stuff, they don't give a rat's ass about the developers lives. Yea, fuck them for making a game that I love and want to pass on. Used games is like pirating, or it should at least be treated the same way. Developers get nothing, publishers get everything. Does that seem fair? It's a real scam.
Now, I havn't specified my opinions and thus execusements can be made, but I'm too lazy, and this is what I generally feel.

It's not a matter of not caring about the publishers or wanting things for free. I can only speak for myself, but to me, it's like previewing something from a company I find questionable or repellant for a portion of the price they're asking. If I like what I see, I become a customer again. If I don't like what I see, I sell the game back and maybe in a few months I'll try another game of theirs used before committing to giving them money again.

It's the same logic with downloading music or watching movies on YouTube--if I like it, I'll buy it so I can listen/watch whenever I want.

[Laize]

the thing is, companies are NOT dying because of used game sales, no matter what they may say. they might be able to say they are "losing money", but they aren't dying. all in all, it only hurts the consumer, because of how overpriced some games are (MW2 was still $60 until MW3 came out, and some games that released last November are still $60). I buy used games because I can't afford new. What companies should do is just go the route of PSN, where if you buy used you have to pay $5 extra to get an online pass code to play the online content. I'm fine with something like that, because buy a $20 game is cheaper than a $50 game, and then $5 extra for online, that's $25 compared to $50. Of course if I had the money, I would buy it new, because you run a risk with used games where they might be close to not working. I bought Soul Caliber IV many years ago, and after about 2 weeks it stopped working because it was already so scratched up.

Let me ask you. Say you owned a development company. 100% of its profits are yours. It costs you about $10 million a year to run. You sell 2 million games and the royalties earn $10.5 million for your company. That keeps you afloat and earns you $500,000! Not bad. Now say you later find out that an additional 1 million people bought your game used. You do the math and realize that comes out to an extra $5 million in royalties. All of which would have been yours.

Wouldnt you want that money in YOUR pocket? Of course you would. Even just a percentage of that would be desirable.

That's not greed. That's making your living and being in business.

[mitbrandir]

Against , those companies already got their money the first the time game was bought. They can't ask double money for 1 copy

[Truhan]

Let me ask you. Say you owned a development company. 100% of its profits are yours. It costs you about $10 million a year to run. You sell 2 million games and the royalties earn $10.5 million for your company. That keeps you afloat and earns you $500,000! Not bad. Now say you later find out that an additional 1 million people bought your game used. You do the math and realize that comes out to an extra $5 million in royalties. All of which would have been yours.

Wouldnt you want that money in YOUR pocket? Of course you would. Even just a percentage of that would be desirable.

That's not greed. That's making your living and being in business.

You are implying that a fully independent developer with no publisher would release a game on consoles as a disc. I highly doubt this would happen. There's also the bigger picture of the one million that sold their used game. I'm sure many of them used the money from selling those copies to subsidize buying newer games.

[natureca]

You should definitely be able to sell your games if you want, where I think the developers get mad is at companies like Gamestop, futureshop, etc. Making money off the resell. If I developed a game, just like if someone made a car, you base how much you charge in the beginning on making enough for you to make a profit and keep going, not on the fact people will resell your game / car.

[shortnugly]

If you work at Gamestop it's probably time to find a new job. EVERYONE sells video games, Target, Walmart, Kmart, ToysRus, etc etc not to mention online retail and digital downloads. If they don't close their doors if used games go away they will be definitely down sizing. Good bye to your local gamestop, you're going to have to drive a few extra miles to get your release night copy because that's the only thing that is going to keep them alive.

Just wait if they win this what happens to the used car industry...

[IIamaKing]

I have bought new exclusively for the past 8 years I do how ever want to be able to resell MY property when I no longer have use of it.

[poser765]

Fuck people are dumb... Why would you not give money to those that made the game? People just want free stuff, they don't give a rat's ass about the developers lives. Yea, fuck them for making a game that I love and want to pass on. Used games is like pirating, or it should at least be treated the same way. Developers get nothing, publishers get everything. Does that seem fair? It's a real scam.
Now, I havn't specified my opinions and thus execusements can be made, but I'm too lazy, and this is what I generally feel.

man so much angst. Look, this is a slippery slope if I ever saw one. Ok you know what, no more used video games. Why stop there? What makes a game different or somehow more special than other commodities. I see a very Orwellian world where if this precedent is set garage sales get stormed by the police.

First it's video games, then music, and movies. then it becomes clothes or shoes, cars, food, electronics, ANYTHING. When I spend money on something it's mine. Why should I be told what to do with MY stuff?

---------- Post added 2012-06-13 at 04:10 PM ----------

Let me ask you. Say you owned a development company. 100% of its profits are yours. It costs you about $10 million a year to run. You sell 2 million games and the royalties earn $10.5 million for your company. That keeps you afloat and earns you $500,000! Not bad. Now say you later find out that an additional 1 million people bought your game used. You do the math and realize that comes out to an extra $5 million in royalties. All of which would have been yours.

Wouldnt you want that money in YOUR pocket? Of course you would. Even just a percentage of that would be desirable.

That's not greed. That's making your living and being in business.

That's true, but as a publisher why should I expect to be able to tell people what they can do with their property?

[Deleted]

Let me ask you. Say you owned a development company. 100% of its profits are yours. It costs you about $10 million a year to run. You sell 2 million games and the royalties earn $10.5 million for your company. That keeps you afloat and earns you $500,000! Not bad. Now say you later find out that an additional 1 million people bought your game used. You do the math and realize that comes out to an extra $5 million in royalties. All of which would have been yours.

Wouldnt you want that money in YOUR pocket? Of course you would. Even just a percentage of that would be desirable.

That's not greed. That's making your living and being in business.

Could not would. What if those 1 million people couldn't afford games for the new price, or just didn't want to pay that much for a game? What if these 1 million people went on to tell their all friends about the game? Imaginary sales aren't real sales and a used sale isn't a lost new sale.

[Deleted]

If i buy a car i expect to be able to sell it when i no longer need it or get my hands on a better car. the same goes with games, i bought the game i should be able to do whatever i want to do with it.

Correct. Plus, if the people who got the games like it (many times they won't be able to play them online anyway) they can buy a copy of their own if they're good enough.

[bals]

I hate the idea of a company telling me how I can or can't use their product after I have bought it. (Blizzard is one of the worst at this)
Can't think of any other industry that is so vehemently opposed to the reselling of their products.

[Deleted]

Bad, if anything this makes the publishers even more lazy bastards and they're going to cut down on funds for projects even more because one part of the competition has been dealt with.

I hate the idea of a company telling me how I can or can't use their product after I have bought it. (Blizzard is one of the worst at this)
Can't think of any other industry that is so vehemently opposed to the reselling of their products.

I'm sure every stockholder/CEO hates second hand, but software is more or less the only industry where you can enforce it.


From the poll:Yes. Companies will be able to get more money for their titles so they can make more great games

No, no they won't if anything the more money the PUBLISHER gets the more the DEVELOPER will be forced to create the same shit again with a new look and slightly adjusted to captivate a wider audience <as fans will buy it anyway>(Old wine in new bags as they call it here <and not old wine in the aged sense>)

[Ciano]

Games are different from cars.

Cars depreciate and wear. Games do not. There is no benefit to buying a game new as opposed to used.

That's the entire reason developers are MAKING benefits to buying games new as opposed to used.

It is cheaper. That is a huge benefit. Games SHOULD depreciate. One year after release, the game should not still be $60.
Also, it's not about depreciation and wear, it's about owning the game. If I buy a deck of playing cards, a golf ball, a book, anything really... I own it. I can resell it. I can give it to a friend. It is mine. If the rumors about the types of DRM's companies like Sony and Microsoft are going to put into their new consoles are true, then I would no longer own the games I buy.

[Ebbikenezer]

Ultimately, if this happens... all I see happening is people buying FAR less games.

What convinces you to buy a game you may be on the fence about? You can buy it used for less, and trade it in when you're done or if you don't like it. Or sell it. This won't happen any more so Indie devs and smaller publishers won't be able to produce as many games if at all.

Also, my personal issue:

We have 2 boys in the house, making for 3 gamers overall, so we have:

-2 PS3s
-3 Xbox 360s
-4 PCs

There aren't a ton of titles we purchase more than one copy of.... sooooo yeah. Now if a game say.. like Skyrim comes out.... I have to buy 3 copies so we can all enjoy it? Are you fucking shitting me?

Simply put: If I can't share a game I purchase throughout the entire household on any of our systems I won't be purchasing any games, products or services from that developer. At all. And it's like this in a lot of households nowadays, so if they think forcefeeding us a line of bullshit about not making enough money is going to fix things... I got some fucking news for them: Shoveling off your "losses" (so to speak) onto consumers is absolutely NOT good business practice and it won't help them in the long run.

Edit: Also, like the post above mine.... at what fucking point are we going to have to get to before we are literally leasing everything in life? If I make a purchase, then I am making that purchase with the understanding that I can do whatever the fuck I want to with MY PROPERTY. If I get forced into not being able to sell, give or trade my own property because they feel it is costing them? Fuck that, I won't support any developer or publisher riding thiss gravy train, nor should anyone else who gives a shit about these little "freedoms" we have involving things we OWN.

[KingHorse]

I dunno. The makers of Hard Rain (a game I never played but understand to be quite excellent) points out that while they sold 2 million copies of the game, their trophy system showed 3 million had played it. Missing out on a full third of your customers is a pretty tough pill to just swallow.

The game company didn't have to pay for the production of those 1million other games that were played. Or, rather, they had already received their payment for those games, so there is no loss whatsoever.

[Deleted]

I'm indifferent to it.

[Ghul]

i have no idea what you guys are discussing about

used games? how do you make a software "used" ?

[Yousend]

I thought Devs got paid for making a game, then Publishers made money from sales. Am I getting it all wrong? Also, used games isn't killing devs. If you make a bad game, it won't sell and then used games won't sell either; you can't have used games if new ones didn't sell.

Also, digital distribution being the primary method to acquire games is bullshit... It's just a way to make more money. (unless they lower the price, I mean I'm sure making a box, printing the design on it and burning it on a DVD isn't free)

[anveena]

I'm against it. You should be able to resell whatever item you buy from any company, it's quite ridiculous the lengths these greedy companies go just to make a extra buck. What the developers should be focusing on is making games worth that $60 price tag.... Most of the games they release are total crap for the price, and then they chug out that DLC a month or two after it comes out just to slap you in the face.