9 replies to this topic

[Nemo]

It's a good thing our next newsletter is coming out on April 2 so no one would confuse it with some of the April Fools Day levity on the Net. We have an op-ed piece from bp9801 you're not going to want to miss.

[ET3D]

The fact that publishers see no money from used games...

I think it's wrong to take that as fact. I'd bet that most of the money customers receive from selling games back goes directly into buying new games.

[bp9801]

The fact that publishers see no money from used games...

I think it's wrong to take that as fact. I'd bet that most of the money customers receive from selling games back goes directly into buying new games.

Or it could go into buying more used games.

[Stonerboy779]

Or it could go into buying more used games.

Or maybe it goes into more new games which are then sold off used hwich means one game is really used by two people and depending on when it is sold and bought it could mean that both of the parties pay effectively half rrp which imo is what the rrp should be in the first place.


Seriously look at the kickstarter projects the amount of money being generated is insane and it is being done on volume not mark ups. Come the end of the day I think companies should have enough faith in their product to seriously cut down on rrp (especially if everything is moving to digital format available for download (the time of extras and manuals, maps ect that came with the se are long gone) and just rely on the increased volume of sales when a new game represents a far smaller amount of money not something costing $50-60USD or $90-100AUD if you are unlucky like me.....

[bp9801]

Or maybe it goes into more new games which are then sold off used hwich means one game is really used by two people and depending on when it is sold and bought it could mean that both of the parties pay effectively half rrp which imo is what the rrp should be in the first place.


Seriously look at the kickstarter projects the amount of money being generated is insane and it is being done on volume not mark ups. Come the end of the day I think companies should have enough faith in their product to seriously cut down on rrp (especially if everything is moving to digital format available for download (the time of extras and manuals, maps ect that came with the se are long gone) and just rely on the increased volume of sales when a new game represents a far smaller amount of money not something costing $50-60USD or $90-100AUD if you are unlucky like me.....

The sale of a used game has all the proceeds going directly to the store. Be it $5 or $55, the store selling the used game sees everything. The company that made the game sees nothing from a used game sale, as in, when someone walks into GameStop (or a local equivalent) and purchases a used game, GameStop gets that money directly.

Assuming what someone does with the paltry amount they receive from selling a game back to the store is of no use. The money could go to a new game, a used game, or (if they opt for cash) to buy something else entirely.

[bilcliff]

you know what. for the industry's sake i hope that the rumours are true that it prevents used games for 3 reasons.

1) we can bloody stop hearing publishers talk about used killing the industry or used games are worse than piracy every few weeks.

2) We wont have to hear devs / publishers trying to justify hiding content behind an online pass for single player games (im looking at you arkham city and Kingdoms of amalur)

3) Most importantly: when revenues fall and they've got their mandatory always-on internet so no-one is pirating on consoles, and no-one is buying used. they have no-one else to point the finger at. there will be no more excuses for them to hide behind. I believe the saying goes "They will have made their bed and now they will have to sleep in it". And you know what, killing the used market may very well cause the industry to crash. We may lose some devs / publishers out of it. But IMO its the crash the industry needs to have. Publishers need to update their business models and need to make more sustainable business decisions rather than milking genres and franchises to death in the hope of short term profits i.e. madden, guitar hero, tony hawk's etc.

Now there are those who will disagree with my opinion. that's fine, they're entitled to. From where i sit, the lack used game market isn't an issue for me. 90% of my gaming is done on PC (no used market there). I also game rarely on my PS3, and all my ps3 games except 1 or 2 were purchased new.

[NikoDG]

Now there are those who will disagree with my opinion. that's fine, they're entitled to. From where i sit, the lack used game market isn't an issue for me. 90% of my gaming is done on PC (no used market there). I also game rarely on my PS3, and all my ps3 games except 1 or 2 were purchased new.

PC master race, ftw

[bp9801]

And you know what, killing the used market may very well cause the industry to crash. We may lose some devs / publishers out of it. But IMO its the crash the industry needs to have. Publishers need to update their business models and need to make more sustainable business decisions rather than milking genres and franchises to death in the hope of short term profits i.e. madden, guitar hero, tony hawk's etc.

So we have the crash of 1977 that wiped out all the Pong clones, then the North American crash of 1983 that bankrupted several companies, and then the used game crash of 2014 or 2015 (or whenever)? I can see that happening, oddly.

[ComputerEd]

You know, playing devils advocate here for a second, what does the used game market bring the game developer? I mean there are a lot of people out there that buy only used games, this means they do not in any way support the development of the game in the question. Now I am leaving the publishers out of this because I think they, like the publishers in the recording industry are the dodo and not yet aware they are about to go extinct. However we are back to the fact that the people that make the games need to be paid and anything that makes them have less incentive to produce a great game is not a good thing.

I mean this can work for the gamers as better too. The current system right now is to produce a quick game with lots of eye candy and little content. The gamers rush out and buy it and then when done flip it as used and go to the next piece of fluff. If the used game market is dried up then the game flipping ends which means if a game does not have substance to it, some meat, then it will not get bought, developers will have to spend less time on fluff and more time on depth because impulse buying of new games will fall off.

[Master Binky]

The problem with used games isn't the $20/$5 dollar used game bins. It's that stores like Gamestop and Hastings try to shovel used games down every customer's throats at a $5 dollar discount (or more when the publisher makes the store compensate the used game price for online stuff). I personally HATE this, not the used game bins that are great, but the push by the stores to undercut new games by a few dollars.

If the customer sells the game back and does not recieve cash, the store is still earning money on the workable cash they own while the store credit does nothing for the customer, where the store wins again, this is also why it is so hard to maintain a zero balance on virtual stores such as xbox, the companies don't mind holding millions of dollars and gaining a little interest for free.

I don't agree with the methods the gaming industry is taking to rein in used games. I think removing used games from consoles will be a Pyrrhic victory for the gaming industry. I don't know what else they should do though, what the retail stores are doing isn't right either, just because it is legal doesn't make it right. I buy new because I like knowing I'm supporting the company that made the game and hope to see more from them. Saving $8 dollars isn't worth supporting a stupid retail chain and crapping on the industry so I can eat one more # at a fast food chain on the way home.