Volition's Jameson Durall says banning pre-owned games is "fantastic" [Escapist]

[Gameguy]

Oh don't worry, PC gaming already has you covered. Most titles that even get a boxed release now require you to sign up to a service or something to actually play your game.

I found this out when I tried to trade a box full of somewhat recent PC games into EB Games, I wasn't expecting much trade in value just around a few dollars each(if that) as some are still $20 new. I was told that because a large number of PC games now come with one time use codes they don't accept PC games at all for trade in even if they don't need registration codes to work. Now I won't bother buying current PC games, I'll stick with games from at least 10 years ago or more. It's not like I won't have enough games to play with just sticking to older games.

The real problem is that companies can't budget their games properly anymore, they cost as much as a big budget feature film but they don't have the same long term appeal as films do so they won't make as much money from them. Just make them like good low budget films, focus on the fun and worry less about the realism or special effects. The good low budget films just focus on having a good time, like Evil Dead or the original Halloween. Just focus on fun stuff and they'll sell fine.

[Emperor Megas]

The good low budget films just focus on having a good time, like Evil Dead or the original Halloween. Just focus on fun stuff and they'll sell fine.

Man, I wish the original Halloween did focus on fun stuff.

[Press_Start]

Your Industry needs a shakeup, It's getting stagnant, greedy and void of any creativity. Proof is in your products and the mindset that you have in writing this post.

A quote from AltDevBlogADay that sums up my thoughts nicely.

[Aussie2B]

Yes, what a wonderful idea, let's mass produce a product that becomes completely worthless, unusable trash once the original purchaser is tired of it. Let's just fill up our landfills even more and make our society even more wasteful. That's really the path to the future. Thrift stores are just evil, what with how they encourage people to reuse and recycle and save money too.

These developers need to grow the balls to admit the real problem here. It's not "used game sales"; it's GameStop. GameStop has a monopoly, and they have the developers bending over getting reamed. They've completely manipulated the system to make greater profits on used sales than new, which is hurting the developers and consumers alike. If they focused on selling new games as they should, game developers wouldn't care about the used sales at independent stores, thrifts, pawns, between friends, etc. I hate to turn this into another anti-GameStop discussion, but they're seriously at the root of this.

[Leo_A]

I'm all for attacking GameStop, but I don't see the point when they've done nothing wrong to warrant the attack. GameStop isn't the problem here. It's the publishers and developers.

[Aussie2B]

I already explained how they ARE the problem here. They make more money off of used sales than sales of new games, which is NOT how it should be, and because of that, they put more effort into moving used goods, even if a game launched just a few days prior. This takes a huge chunk out of the sales of new copies that should be taking place. This is why developers are complaining. They're not losing money because a Goodwill is selling a copy of their game months or years later. It's all because of GameStop. If they made more money selling new games or if they had some kind of restrictions on how/when they could sell used copies (at the very least, not trying to convince customers to go with a used copy over a new one three days after launch just to save 5 bucks), we wouldn't see developers/publishers so concerned about used games.

[kedawa]

If gamers would just sell their games privately instead of trading them for peanuts at Gamestop, that wouldn't even be an issue.

[Robocop2]

I already explained how they ARE the problem here. They make more money off of used sales than sales of new games, which is NOT how it should be, and because of that, they put more effort into moving used goods, even if a game launched just a few days prior. This takes a huge chunk out of the sales of new copies that should be taking place. This is why developers are complaining. They're not losing money because a Goodwill is selling a copy of their game months or years later. It's all because of GameStop. If they made more money selling new games or if they had some kind of restrictions on how/when they could sell used copies (at the very least, not trying to convince customers to go with a used copy over a new one three days after launch just to save 5 bucks), we wouldn't see developers/publishers so concerned about used games.

Why is that not how it should be? Many many things are far more profitable used for the second had seller than a new one. The margins on new product is usually significantly smaller than used, at least as far as the retailer is concerned. Any company is in business to make money in the most efficient, profitable manner which in this case, is used games at least for GS and the like (There is more than one major retailer out there that deals in used games yes?). Yes they pay peanuts to the consumer but that' s the consumer's fault for taking them up on that. GameStop hasn't manipulated the system. If anything the companies should be glad they exist to take in used games as trade and offer additional bonus credit for new pre-orders sometimes. I would wager that helps more than it hurts publishers.


The real problem is not the seller, its the product. Used games have become a scapegoat for the huge losses that companies suffer and I think an all to convenient one. They have to sell them for a certain price to recoup their expenses but if the consumre is not willing to pay that amount then perhaps a different business model is needed. Perhaps GS could extend an olive branch and offer to put a hold on selling pre-owned copies of a newish release for x days but they shouldn't be forced to do that. And even if they did, I expect that used games would still be the evil cause of new game problems.

[Leo_A]

I already explained how they ARE the problem here. They make more money off of used sales than sales of new games, which is NOT how it should be...

You didn't explain anything about why they're the problem. So they make more money off used games than new and concentrate on it and have grown their business? The last I knew, that was free enterprise at work and there was nothing wrong with it.

All that your explanation provided is a possible partial explanation of why the industry is now paying more attention to used game sales as GameStop's business has grown and they've seen the money they're raking in (And incorrectly assume that every dollar spent on a used game is a dollar they're owed and didn't get). But you've failed to explain why their focus on used games is inherently wrong and why they're to be blamed for the situation.

Saying it should be a specific way doesn't make it so. That's not an explanation in the slightest.

I never really got this analogy, car manufacturers still get money as they sell replacement parts for those older cars. And it's not like that 3 year old car you're trading in is still being sold new. It's like complaining that someone is trading in a copy of Halo 1 to buy a copy of Halo 3, but they're actually complaining about people selling or trading in Halo 3 when Halo 3 is still a new release. I don't think developers deserve a cut on used games but this example just doesn't work as a comparison. Used books are a better example, but I don't hear many people complaining about used book stores or libraries either.

The situation isn't any different in the world of videogames. Microtransactions, single use unlock codes such as online passes, subscription fees, ingame advertising revenue, and I'm sure other ways have made it increasingly possible for console manufacturers, developers, and publishers to make money after the initial sale of a game. That applies to original buyers and those that bought the game second hand, just like the parts replacement business for automobile manufacturers.

[TonyTheTiger]

These developers need to grow the balls to admit the real problem here. It's not "used game sales"; it's GameStop. GameStop has a monopoly, and they have the developers bending over getting reamed. They've completely manipulated the system to make greater profits on used sales than new, which is hurting the developers and consumers alike. If they focused on selling new games as they should, game developers wouldn't care about the used sales at independent stores, thrifts, pawns, between friends, etc. I hate to turn this into another anti-GameStop discussion, but they're seriously at the root of this.

If GameStop's practices are actually a problem (which still hasn't really been established) then that's merely a symptom of the greater cause. GameStop is playing the game by the rules that were set and it just so happens that the most effective way to play the game involves stepping on the toes of publishers. Fact is, new games don't offer a substantial cut for the retailer. Notice how games work differently than DVDs. You never really hear this about movies. Disney isn't going around complaining about used Blu-ray sales.

I'm not exactly saying that the game market should be a 1:1 match of the DVD market in terms of how pricing works. But if GameStop is so ungodly awful then why aren't more people looking at the things that allow GameStop to work that way rather than just pointing the finger at the company itself?

For a gaming analogy, it's like how if somepony is playing a fighting game and his opponent busts out a game breaking infinite combo and instead of either moving to a better game that doesn't have that kind of bullshit or demanding better from the developers he instead complains that his opponent is being "cheap" when all he's doing is playing the game in the best way it allows. He's playing to win, which is the whole point of a fighting game. It's why banning is so frowned upon in the competitive community and only done in the most isolated cases.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. If there happens to be some fatal flaw in the system that allows GameStop to exploit a loophole then fix the goddamn loophole, whatever it is. And if everypony is content with how the system works (pricing, distribution, etc.) then they shouldn't complain when people, or entities in this case, play the game in the most efficient way possible. You know, playing to win. GameStop is the guy dominating the Street Fighter machine while publishers are the scrubs yelling how throws are cheap and how he blocks too much. Either learn to play the game, move to a different game, or keep losing. Another option, provided you're in the position to do so, is to fix the exploit if there is one or to demand it from whoever is in such a position.