If You Resell Your Used Games, the Terrorists Win [Slashdot]

[DP ServBot]

MojoKid writes "Game designer Richard Browne has come out swinging in favor of the rumored antipiracy features in the next-gen PlayStation Orbis and Xbox Durango. 'The real cost of used games is the damage that is being wrought on the creativity and variety of games available to the consumer,' Browne writes. Browne's comments echo those of influential programmer and Raspberry Pi developer David Braben, who wrote last month that '...pre-owned has really killed core games. It's killing single player games in particular, because they will get pre-owned, and it means your day one sales are it, making them super high risk.' Both Browne and Braben conflate hating GameStop (a thoroughly reasonable life choice) with the supposed evils of the used games market. Braben goes so far as to claim that used games are actually responsible for high game prices and that 'prices would have come down long ago if the industry was getting a share of the resells.' Amazingly, no game publishers have stepped forward to publicly pledge themselves to lower game prices in exchange for a cut of used game sales. Publishers are hammering Gamestop (and recruiting developers to do the same) because it's easier than admitting that the current system is fundamentally broken."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

[Griking]

I have no doubt that used game hurt new game sales but I also find it highly unlikely that publishers would lower prices in any meaningful way if used games disappeared or of they got a percentage of used games.

[wingzrow]

Instead of fighting used games they should focus on making better games so people don't get so bored and sick of them after only a week that they sell it to gamestop for less than half of what they originally paid.

[Collector_Gaming]

I honestly don't see what the big deal is here with this whole discussion. The used game industry has been around since the begining of time through Electronics Boutique and mom and pops game stores. Your video rental shops sold games they felt wasn't relevant any more therfore wasn't bringing them in good money.
K mart even sold used games for crying out loud (i remember they would sell NES games put in a cardboard insert with instruction manual if it had it.. and then wrapped up and put a sticker on it.)

So whats the big deal now?
Fat cows pockets not filling up their forever growing need? Booohoooo

like already stated before i highly doubt the market would change even if they got 100% profit of the used game sales. They would just fumble around trying to figure out another way to bitch and gain more profit some how.

[Genesaturn]

Yeah, if not this, they will complain about something else. I don't really see this argument gaining much ground. I think it would hurt them more than help them. I've waited to by a game cheap and used before only to be blown away and continued to buy games from the same company brand new. I'm sure a lot of people get exposed to certain games by buying them pre-owned that they normally wouldn't ever try out. Publishers will loose sales if anything else because they would be cutting out an entire medium for gamers to get games.

[duffmanth]

Instead of fighting used games they should focus on making better games so people don't get so bored and sick of them after only a week that they sell it to gamestop for less than half of what they originally paid.

I totally agree, these fucking publishers and developers need to stop worrying about the used game market and start making games that are actually worth $60. As it stands now maybe 1-2% of the games out there are actually worth $60.

[kupomogli]

I don't think anyone else has taken notice, but most of the developers and publishers complaining about the used game sales are ones that have actually put out quality games.

EA has put out more quality this gen than most of the other publishers. The developer of Kingdoms of Amalur was one who complained about the used game market, and if you've played even the demo, are you really going to say that they need to make a better game rather than complaining? You don't see any low budget developers complaining about used game sales because it took them next to nothing to develop their titles anyways. I'm sure those games that cost almost nothing to make in comparison to Dante's Inferno, Mirror's Edge, Kingdom's of Amalur, etc, are just raking in the cash.

I'd understand the quote "If you want to reduce used games sales, then make better games," if it were developers and publishers that released garbage, but when the best games are the ones that don't sell and make their way to being used games because that's how the mentality of today's gamer is; finish the game and trading it in for something new, then it's clear that those posting that quote haven't played anything from these developers/publisher.

Saints Row the Third developer, Volition, is also another who spoke up about used games sales hurting the industry. They should make better games instead of complaining about used games. Oh wait. Saints Row the Third is another quality game.

The article at slashdot is pretty shitty though. It's a massively cut down article of the original story.

http://www.vg247.com/2012/04/12/indu...single-player/

Not everyone is a collector and with today's gamers selling whatever game they finish as used and picking up a new used copy, along with Gamestops seven day used game return policy, titles that are exclusively single player have a much harder chance in staying in the players hands. We're all aware that it's the reason multiplayer has been tacked onto pretty much literally everything in effort to keep the games in the players collection as long as possible. Even having developers going so far as to include difficult to acquire online trophies and achievements for those trophy and achievement hunters out there(although these people usually Gamefly the titles.)

To Browne, the true cost of used game sales is the variety in the market is dwindling as games which were successful in the past as a single-player offering, are now being “redesigned out of their element to introduce multiplayer features.”

So while not all developers have spoken out about used games hurting the industry, it's quite obvious they're tired of it when gamese like Assassin's Creed and Ninja Gaiden start offering multiplayer to keep players owning the game for a bit longer. This is time and money that could have been better spent at making a more solid single player experience.

[Griking]

Instead of fighting used games they should focus on making better games so people don't get so bored and sick of them after only a week that they sell it to gamestop for less than half of what they originally paid.

That's nice to say but it has nothing to do with people who prefer to purchase used games over new ones.

I honestly don't see what the big deal is here with this whole discussion. The used game industry has been around since the begining of time through Electronics Boutique and mom and pops game stores. Your video rental shops sold games they felt wasn't relevant any more therfore wasn't bringing them in good money.
K mart even sold used games for crying out loud (i remember they would sell NES games put in a cardboard insert with instruction manual if it had it.. and then wrapped up and put a sticker on it.)

So whats the big deal now?

It's a combination of multiple things. Tighter budgets and the fact that Gamestop earns like 10 billion a year. Having a world wide chain of stores that specialize in used games isn't the same as a bunch of independently owned video stores selling off their old stock every year or so. When you walk into your local Gamestop and pick up a game from the new game shelf the employee will ask you if you'd like a used copy instead for $5 less instead (more if you have one of their cards). They're making a living out of talking people out of buying new games. I think that's where it rubs developers the wrong way.

I totally agree, these fucking publishers and developers need to stop worrying about the used game market and start making games that are actually worth $60. As it stands now maybe 1-2% of the games out there are actually worth $60.

If a developer made a fantastic game and say charged $40 for it instead of the normal $60, they did everything right, you know damned well that people would still chose to purchase the used copy for $5-$8 less over the new one. This statement is just posturing by gamers just like developers and publishers who claim that new games would cost less if there weren't used games to compete with. Both claims are pretty much bullshit but neither will be able to be proved so people keep saying them.

[Daria]

Kupomogli: Hey Kingdoms of Amalur started off good but got way too repetitive fast. If there was ever a game I wish I had waited on it's that one.

My issue with the whole kill used games sales, is many titles don't have more than a single print run. So what if I don't buy a game immediately I'm screwed? If I don't discover a game until it's out of print tough shit? Sometimes used is your only option.

[chrisbid]

if the industry wants to lock out used games, go for it. theyll keep me from buying used games.

of course i will no longer buy their consoles or new games, but a success is a success.


PROFITS HO!

[theclaw]

It's a symptom of publishers not understanding the fuck about user interests.

Make more mass-market friendly games. Promote them longer at retail and with DLC or other promotions. If a game's sales/prices (new or used) drop unusually fast, those are signs people may be losing interest in it.

Games people want to buy new have no need for DRM and hampering of used sales. Something like New Super Mario Bros which can keep selling years on end without need for any restrictions, and less risk due to fairly low development budget compared with "AAA" console action titles.

[Gamereviewgod]

It's a combination of multiple things. Tighter budgets and the fact that Gamestop earns like 10 billion a year. Having a world wide chain of stores that specialize in used games isn't the same as a bunch of independently owned video stores selling off their old stock every year or so. When you walk into your local Gamestop and pick up a game from the new game shelf the employee will ask you if you'd like a used copy instead for $5 less instead (more if you have one of their cards). They're making a living out of talking people out of buying new games. I think that's where it rubs developers the wrong way.

GameStop creates a central gaming economy where the games are like a revolving door, new or used. The industry knows this. The hypocrisy is a company like EA or UbiSoft bitching about used sales, and then giving GameStop exclusives to pre-orders or other such bonuses. If GameStop was so evil as these companies claim them to be, they wouldn't support them. Instead, they do, because there's too much value in the GS brand while trying to convince consumers to go against their own rights.

[Berserker]

The purchase and sale of used goods has always and will always negatively impact the producers of new goods. It only became this great plight in this one specific area because they've suddenly gained the capacity to control it.

[Gameguy]

[theclaw]

The purchase and sale of used goods has always and will always negatively impact the producers of new goods. It only became this great plight in this one specific area because they've suddenly gained the capacity to control it.

The best solution for this "problem" is common sense. Be more selective in the first place about deciding to fund projects unlikely to succeed. Far too much R&D resources are wasted on canceled games, incomplete assets left unused on game discs, whole localizations never released...

Look how many leaked prototype games are out there.
Or stuff like Japanese mode Advance Wars Days of Ruin. That's a LOT of effort into stuff gamers can't even officially see.

[The 1 2 P]

A title like that is bound to turn into the next Direct Tv commercial. I didn't think anything could top the Charlie Sheen one but this might do it.

[Clownzilla]

if the industry wants to lock out used games, go for it. theyll keep me from buying used games.

of course i will no longer buy their consoles or new games, but a success is a success.


PROFITS HO!

I'm already on the edge of not buying next-gen systems because of overuse of DLC content. If I can't buy and\or play used games then it would be a pretty clear choice. I just can't see any reputable game company blocking out used sales. However, the industry has changed so much since my first NES in 1985 I really don't know what to think about it anymore.

[j_factor]

I rarely buy new games, and when I do, it's after the price has dropped. $60 is just too rich for my blood. Lower the initial asking price, and I'll bite. In the late PSX era (including PC games of the time), new games were $40.

[SpaceHarrier]

Problems with killing the used games market (that have probably been posted before about a million times):

1. People trade in used games to get store credit toward new release games. Cut off this source of 'currency' gamers have at their disposal = less new product moved.

2. "I'll just wait until the price drops... alot." I'd imagine many, many gamers will have a sense of diminished return on a game they are now stuck with, and thus will place even less value on each purchase than they currently do.

Honestly, the whole thing reminds me of the music industry from a few years ago, trying to desparately think of any way to cling to business models of the past, even as the walls cave in around them (via piracy, second-hand sales, whatever). Except aren't videogame sales exploding right now, as in it's still an expanding market? I don't get it..

[duffmanth]

That's nice to say but it has nothing to do with people who prefer to purchase used games over new ones.



It's a combination of multiple things. Tighter budgets and the fact that Gamestop earns like 10 billion a year. Having a world wide chain of stores that specialize in used games isn't the same as a bunch of independently owned video stores selling off their old stock every year or so. When you walk into your local Gamestop and pick up a game from the new game shelf the employee will ask you if you'd like a used copy instead for $5 less instead (more if you have one of their cards). They're making a living out of talking people out of buying new games. I think that's where it rubs developers the wrong way.



If a developer made a fantastic game and say charged $40 for it instead of the normal $60, they did everything right, you know damned well that people would still chose to purchase the used copy for $5-$8 less over the new one. This statement is just posturing by gamers just like developers and publishers who claim that new games would cost less if there weren't used games to compete with. Both claims are pretty much bullshit but neither will be able to be proved so people keep saying them.

If publishers and developers are so pissed at Gamestop for pushing used games more than new games, the publishers/developers need to negotiate a better profit margin with retailers like Gamestop and indy stores as well. I use to work at an indy game store in Canada and the average profit margin on a new $60-80 game was somewhere between $5-10. If gaming retailers didn't sell used games, systems, and accessories, they probably wouldn't be in business. If developers charged $40 instead $60 for a new game sure there's going to be people that will still buy the used copy for $30-35, not me and many others I know though, I would gladly pick up the new copy for $5 more. My point is that if more new games were actually worth $60 maybe more people would be inclined to pick it up new and not wait for a year for it to be discounted. I don't believe for 1 second that new games would be cheaper if they didn't have used games to compete with, these companies are just too greedy to let that happen. Lastly there's always going to be gamers that can't afford $60 games new and will always buy used or wait until new games are discounted, so developers need to stop worrying about the used market and focus more on what they can do to make people buy new, either charge $60 and make sure the game is actually worth it or drop your prices.

[Collector_Gaming]

EA has put out more quality this gen than most of the other publishers. The developer of Kingdoms of Amalur was one who complained about the used game market, and if you've played even the demo, are you really going to say that they need to make a better game rather than complaining? You don't see any low budget developers complaining about used game sales because it took them next to nothing to develop their titles anyways. I'm sure those games that cost almost nothing to make in comparison to Dante's Inferno, Mirror's Edge, Kingdom's of Amalur, etc, are just raking in the cash.

Its kinda hard to go a whole year without publishing a winner when you own half the industry of game companies (or buy em out and take em out back and give em the old yellar treatment).

and also have the contract to being exclusive to release certain games (like that deal they have with NFL.. basically forcing all companies to back off from making football games unless they are fantasy based)

Remember kids............... If you can't beat em.............. Buy em out or shut em out........ Its the way of Electronic Arts industry

[Griking]

The best solution for this "problem" is common sense. Be more selective in the first place about deciding to fund projects unlikely to succeed. Far too much R&D resources are wasted on canceled games, incomplete assets left unused on game discs, whole localizations never released...

Look how many leaked prototype games are out there.
Or stuff like Japanese mode Advance Wars Days of Ruin. That's a LOT of effort into stuff gamers can't even officially see.

So if a company is more selective about the games that they make people will buy more new games and less used one?

Edit: And that's actually a pretty funny and sad cartoon. Probably because its true.

[theclaw]

So if a company is more selective about the games that they make people will buy more new games and less used one?

In effect yes. You aren't getting either from a game not released. Millions of dollars and combined man-hours to produce zero sales isn't a good practice in any industry.

Of course there are situations difficult to control. Development hell doesn't help either.

[kupomogli]

Its kinda hard to go a whole year without publishing a winner when you own half the industry of game companies (or buy em out and take em out back and give em the old yellar treatment).

and also have the contract to being exclusive to release certain games (like that deal they have with NFL.. basically forcing all companies to back off from making football games unless they are fantasy based)

Remember kids............... If you can't beat em.............. Buy em out or shut em out........ Its the way of Electronic Arts industry

People act like EA is the only one who's ever closed down a development studio. There are many different developers owned by others which have shut down. Maybe you think EA should still be paying the salaries of these people despite the studios last efforts remaining in the red? The Saboteur is a great game, but if you look at the sales, it's quite obvious why Pandemic was closed down. More than likely a lot of employees went to other EA development studios and others that got laid off probably are probably working with other companies.

Capcom closed down Clover Studios. Why? Because God Hand, amazing as it was, sold like shit. They lost money with the development of that game.

[Collector_Gaming]

People act like EA is the only one who's ever closed down a development studio. There are many different developers owned by others which have shut down. Maybe you think EA should still be paying the salaries of these people despite the studios last efforts remaining in the red? The Saboteur is a great game, but if you look at the sales, it's quite obvious why Pandemic was closed down. More than likely a lot of employees went to other EA development studios and others that got laid off probably are probably working with other companies.

Capcom closed down Clover Studios. Why? Because God Hand, amazing as it was, sold like shit. They lost money with the development of that game.

and just because mentioned them in this

Watch tomorrows gaming headlines

"Electronic Arts purchases gaming giant Capcom for undisclosed amount"

What EA's business model is basically is creating a monopoly buying everything out untill in the end its all by its lonesome no competition.
Other companies have been trying similar style business models for years. Walmart being the brick and mortar store version of this basically running every mom and pops store and most other store companies out of town by providing everything with lower prices. (i remember reading a article about how they were thinking about creating a general store style format to put in small towns. basically doing everything you mom and pops general stores do but with walmart prices).
But its not always their fault i will admit.
Banks for instance when they shot themselves in the foot and thought it would be cool to charge outrageous fees for banking. Everyone decided it would be better to head to walmart to cash their pay checks. Which i also read walmart at one point in time threw around the idea of making their own full on banking system. But decided to scrap it as it felt like too much of a hassle.

the biggest monopoly business model we all know is AMAZON.com where it sells litterally everything dirt cheap so cheap that it even has walmart shaking at the knees.

I know i sound like a tin foil hat individual when i say it and i've said a few times before on this forum. But a monopoly system is a very very bad economic choice (i mean the higher ups with the bottomless pockets this is the perfect choice cause they will fix their ever growing demand on cash). To have economy people have to have something of value in trade (which we use money in this day in age). How is one suppose to be able to get that when all the jobs that pay us this money are being run out by a monopoly system? Specially one that buys its competition and then shuts it down to eliminate it.
Not everyone can work at mcdonalds and be a construction worker and a government official (until they find a way to monopolize that.... and i am sure congress is already trying to find a way to do that as we speak)

Thats why me myself.. When i goto purchase goods i prefer brick and mortar.. for one and if i am really feeling generous mom and pop stores over online/giant corporations. Only time i would choose otherwise is either because i can't get the goods there... or i am in finacial pinch and i need that item now for something (like take for instance i wanna do a photo shoot a few weeks ago and needed a light reflector which goes for about 85 bucks at a photography shop.... online 15)