@conkerton How does me buying a movie justify a used market in gaming? Sorry, you lost me. If you get a positive friend review of a game why do you need to save $5-10 to get it used? I get that devs don't always live up to the promises they make and those who make bad products eventually get weeded out. But if your friend told you the game was great and you were able to go look at the reviews, check out the trailers, and buy a "used copy" that doesn't give you full function of the game but allows you to play enough of it to see if you want to invest in it to buy the unlock code, then what is the harm in that? Doesn't Gamestop give like a 3 day return for any reason policy anyway? I'd think you could try a lot more games cheaper since getting a used copy won't cost as much and you can make a decision of if you want to go all in later.
Rumors for the next-gen PlayStation and Xbox point to secondhand circumvention systems, but companies would be better served by bringing accessibility to their business models.
When gaming archeologists look back on this era of the industry, they will no doubt identify two directly contrasting storylines. The first is about the tremendous expansion of the medium thanks to innovations like touch screens, motion controls, and a design focus on accessibility, where anyone can play, and nobody should be discouraged by difficulty. The other storyline deals with the industry's digital revolution, where publishers can exert previously unheard of control over every aspect of a game, with digital rights management, online passes, post-release patches, downloadable content, microtransactions, and virtual currencies.
This snapshot of where games are today underscores a somewhat surprising contradiction with the way the industry goes about its business. At the same time games are striving to be more inclusive and approachable for players, the business surrounding them is growing more obstacle-ridden and hostile for consumers.
The latest example of this can be seen in the rumors surrounding next-gen systems. A Kotaku report today said Sony's next PlayStation will thwart used game sales by forcing players to tie physical games to their account. If they trade those titles in, the next person to play them will get a hobbled version of the game along with an option to pay money to unlock the full package. It sounds like an online pass program, but potentially with a lot more of the game locked away. Similar rumors have been surrounding the next Xbox and Sony's PlayStation Vita can already identify secondhand games and prevent players from earning trophies with them. Even though there's an easy workaround for the Vita's measure, it's clear there's no shortage of intent on the part of console makers to discourage used game sales.
"At the same time games are striving to be more inclusive and approachable for players, the business surrounding them is growing more obstacle-ridden and hostile for consumers."
The big problem with the push against used game sales is that it changes the status quo in favor of the publishers and console makers without offering benefits to the consumer in exchange. This could prevent players from sharing games with friends, getting better prices than retailers will offer, or paying for new titles by selling the games they don't play any more. And in return for losing all of that, the gamers get… huh.
It's the same with digital rights management. By forcing customers to jump through hoops to register a game, stay online while playing a game, or install and run unrelated programs on their computers, publishers might delay the onset of widespread piracy. So in return for having their games saddled with potential hassles and a definite lifespan (once the authentication servers are shut off, those games stop working), the players receive benefits like… um…
There's no shortage of developers who would argue that the benefit consumers derive from these schemes is that games continue to be made. Some of the creators behind Kinectimals, Too Human, and Red Faction: Armageddon have not been shy about calling out the scourge of secondhand sales, and making dire predictions about its impact on the industry. The critics of used game sales are right in saying they can cut into new sales, that those sales don't put money directly in the developers' pockets, and that buying new is a better way to support the developers so they can make more of the games you love.
But used gaming is not a threat to the industry so much as it is a threat to the status quo. AAA game development became significantly more expensive with the introduction of high-definition consoles, and the next generation of systems is only going to push those budgets further into the realm of absurdity. Used gaming is a threat to that, because companies look at every player that buys a used copy as one less person in the game's total addressable audience, one less sale to help offset the development and marketing investments those games require.
"Used gaming is not a threat to the industry so much as it is a threat to the status quo."
Between the moaning from the industry and the $2.62 billion in full-year used product sales GameStop reported last week (up $150 million from the year prior), it's clear there's a significant market for used games. And really, GameStop is almost the entire market, which has led to a dysfunctional relationship between the specialty retailer and game companies. GameStop is simultaneously a customer of and competitor to publishers and console makers, buying their goods new on the one hand while directing consumers to more attractively priced used versions on the other. It's like an abusive relationship where the game industry is only sticking around because it hasn't squirreled away enough money to skip town, and it's the rank-and-file gamers who wind up suffering the worst of the fallout.
Dysfunction aside, the used game market is ultimately good because it shows there is healthy demand for games in the industry in spite of the onerous measures publishers are taking to discourage secondhand sales. Maybe certain companies will go under because the missing revenue caused by used sales somehow makes the difference between keeping the lights on and calling it quits. Maybe there will be fewer Call of Duty clones, or fewer AAA bets on original intellectual properties. But the underlying demand for games will ensure that the industry presses on; it's just a matter of what form it will take as it does. And as with any sea change in a consumer industry, it will be the entrenched giants who seek to impose their terms on the market who drown in the tide.
This generation has seen numerous fortunes made by tearing down the walls that previously kept non-gamers from engaging in the hobby. At the same time, many of the industry's largest players have aggressively alienated their core audience by burdening them with schemes, hassles, and obstacles to enjoyment which convey little to no actual benefit to the player. So here's hoping that the console makers have the foresight to identify the twin storylines at work in the industry today, and let that shape a future that's more consumer-friendly, and ultimately more successful.
The problem i have with everything being digital that a lot of the games that come out are not worth thd $$$ they are charging...I bought a used copy of dead rising last night 18.99 it was 30 new it wasnt worth the 19 spent already....I just feel it will cause a more selective process with your games if you purchase a bad product and can get nothing in return...i think it might hurt the industry even more
@lance_7 I find it hard to believe you have never bought a movie ever. However, those behind the scenes, making of, and writer/director/actor definitely assist us in weeding out the crap. While positive friend reviews may change my mind to get one. Same with the gaming industry. It absolutely justifies a secondary used market for those who followed dev and pre release media. Devs swear and promise everything under the sun in most cases, but sadly very few deliver.
This guy has the right idea, but the level of journalism is too simplistic to bear. I feel like I'm reading a high school student's essay. But if you guys are interested in reading more about the issue in an article that really cuts to the core, here you go: http://www.the-ghetto.org/content/used-video-games-the-new-software-piracy
If anybody can help me,please do.I am new to this psn thingy and I am still level 1.If I WOULD LIKE to be a pro,how much my level would be?And do not worry i will finish the level 1 and even 2 soon.I just have a ps vita
There's already a digital-only, no-used-sales model that works - it's called Steam. Believe me, I was very apprehensive when I had to start tying my CD keys to my account, and it was not nearly problem-free in the early days. But, today, I can't remember the last time I bought a PC game on disc. It's convenient, it's easy to manage files, and the prices are good (and Steam has some of the best sales promotions out there). Of course there are other good download options, but Valve nailed it. Meanwhile, PC games have all but disappeared from retail shelves, without damaging the market. If the console makers can successfully emulate that model, then there's nothing to worry about. The question is, can they? The PSP Go, being digital-only, shows how terribly wrong it could go. Poor selection, poor pricing, poor store interface, poor file management - Sony just blew it. If the future is Steam-on-consoles, consumers will be better off than they are now. If it's PSP-Go-supersized, it will be a disaster.
@lance_7 Agreed. Game Stop needs to get moving on it so we consumers don't get burned,and I agree about fully digital content. I'm sort of split both ways on that one. I guess we'll have to wait for the next generation to ensue and see what happens,but some of this sounds pretty risky. All 3 are in an excellent position to move forward,but if the Wii U doesn't catch on,or if Sony and M$ tick off too many people with lots of restrictions and console prices in excess of 5 or 6 hundred dollars they may be in trouble. So best of luck to them.I'll be watching.
@Wormkid_64 It would be nice if they could find a way to work things out that benefits everyone. You never know, maybe they are using this option as a way to gain leverage in negotiations. If used games leave then that will be a bunch of people out of jobs and that is the last thing anyone needs right now. If Game Stop is smart they are initiating conversations with these companies to share a portion of the profits. I just hope they aren?t too greedy to save themselves. I?m torn on going fully digital. I like the idea of being lazy, sitting on my couch, saying the name of a game, telling it to play, and that being it. Instead of having to go fumble around through all the games looking for it and hoping the disc was put back in the case. My big issue with it is HD space. If they want us to download crap I want the next consoles to come out with a minimum of 500GB. These 80 and 200GB drives can barely handle small games and demos. They need to up the capacity and not charge a arm and a leg for hard drives.
@lance_7 You also make a good point. Here's my only idea for a solution. I believe it may have been mentioned before,but it makes sense. Car manufacturers can make deals with dealers so that they make a percentage off of used cars that are sold. Game companies should try to find a way to so the same. Now of course,GameStop and Best Buy won't like the fact that they will lose that percentage from the price of the game,but let's face it,GameSpot has been ripping people off for years by buying games from people for $2 and turning around and selling them for $20.(They actually almost did that to a friend of mine.) The ball is in their court.If they can't come to a sensible solution,pirates will increase,and loyal customers will decrease. I do also believe that we're entering the digital world,and physical media probably won't last,which I think is a shame. I like digital except for the fact that if something happens to your machine or the online database you lose your data,and that you can't share with friends without signing in on their console. But I suppose the good outweighs the bad in that it's cheaper and quicker.
People who buy used games are people who are not the typical gaming consumer. Its a consumer companies should not target. Sony and Microsoft should not do this.
my answer is going to most likely be simply not buying / playing games. there is plenty in life to keep ourselves entertained that does not require the massive outlay of funds that gaming is starting to demand. If the companies push customers too far there will be more of us that just stop buying completely.
So what Brendan? Car dealers are both friend and foe to car manufacturers, yet no authentication server or intentionally gimped used cars are even talked about in that or any other industry. This is such a greedy, industry-hurting tactic. Even if Sony and Microsoft do this, I almost bet Gamestop, Gamerz, Gamefly, Blockbuster, ect. will take them to court for unfair trade practices. People that buy used probably wouldn't have bought the game at full retail to begin with! Why do Sony and M$ choose to ignore this obvious caveat? More gamers will be flying the black flag of piracy, while the rest will simply play less games on Playstation 4 and Xbox 720 and spend money on other forms of entertainment (PC gaming, Netflix, sporting events, reading, web surfing, mobile gaming, free to play gaming, social network gaming, ect.).
@digitaltiger I completely agree. Sony is already struggling financially, which is why I think they are willing to make this push against used games. This next console could be their make or break entry imo. If it succeeds then Vita & the brand could succeed with it, but if it fails then Vita will fail & it could threaten the entire company. I?m curious to see how they approach this new console. With the PS3 they poured a lot of money into it & lost a ton initially while turning off consumers with poor pricing, marketing, & overall arrogance. I think they learned a lot from that but I?m wondering if they will hold back on the tech side to save money this time & keep cost down. If they overload it & it cost either too much to produce or is overpriced it could doom them. If they skimp on tech & Microsoft goes all in it could tilt things completely & leave them out. On the other hand there is Nintendo, who seems to be forgetting their audience. They seem to be doing enough to catch up with the current consoles & finally enter the HD era, while not doing enough to really solidify them as a next gen console & captivate the hard core audience. Their new console doesn?t seem to satisfy hard core & it seems like it may be moving away from the casual space a bit. I think they will succeed or fail based on price as well. I?m not sure many of those casual fans that bought a Wii are even interested in buying another console again, ever. Continued below
If it is cheap enough they may embrace it. But with the original Wii they made money on every purchase because it was so cheap to make. Will this be the same way or will the hardware either cause them to take a loss on initial sales or price out the casual fans that built them up this current cycle? My fear with Apple would be price as well, but they are also carrying a ton of momentum. Even though their products are expensive they sell out. They have a built in audience ready to spend money on seemingly everything they make. I think the thing that would help them succeed would be their service rather than the actual gaming device. If they had a console that just brought complete integration with their current devices and left it as an open platform like they have now could you imagine the possibilities. People could make apps that you could use to tap into your home surveillance equipment and you can view all that on your living room TV for instance. Or something where you have the video camera on the iPad pointed at something and it is showing up on your TV. You have a group of friends that come over that all either have an iPad or a iPhone and you are playing a card game where your cards show up on the device in your hand while the TV is the playing table. Who knows what they come up with? Maybe they package an iTouch or an iPad in with every console.
@lance_7 Even a 50% collapse in the markets could bring down 1 or more of the big three. That would be a good time for apple to enter and take a strangle hold. Alot will depend on how the next gen consoles do and if the big 3 tick off to many people with software restrictions. The only problem I see apple having in the console market is that apple would probably over charge for the console, if they think their going to charge $1000 for a console their going to flop big time.
@digitaltiger The console games industry made $2.62 billion in used game sales alone in the past year. It isn?t growing at the rate it was before the economy took its down turn, but I doubt it goes away in 2-3 years. I wouldn?t be shocked to see someone fall out though. I also wouldn?t be shocked to see another company enter. I think Nintendo may be next generations Sega with Wii U being the Dreamcast. The Wii U controller is intriguing but there are already reports claiming it isn?t even as powerful as 360 and PS3. That would probably mean that as the next generation of the Xbox and PS arrive the Wii U will probably once again lose 3rd party support because it can?t keep up with what the other two consoles can deliver. Mario going the way of Sonic and ending up on XBL and PSN in 2016? I think the company that could enter the market may be Apple. They are seeing the potential of what the money from the gaming market can be with their apps, but they aren?t a gaming device at this point. How much money could they bring in if they built a console that gave you full access to the app store, with iPhones & iPads integration, Airplay, and was equally console wise with Xbox and PS consoles have? It seems like the battle Sony and Microsoft have been trying to win is for the center of your home entertainment experience. Apple hasn?t even been trying that hard and they are almost there. At a minimum they could enter on a Wii U level and take out Nintendo.
@Wormkid_64 You?ve made some solid points. I understand the idea that they are now trying to take away something that has been around for 30 years. The thing is technology has only recently advance to the point that it is possible to do this. This is the first console generation that every console has internet connectivity out of the box. Next console generation will be the first generation that every console has wireless internet connectivity out of the box. Internet speeds are finally getting to the point that you can download and upload information in a practical amount of time for them to even consider going this route. You say they should just make an arrangement with Game Stop, but that is the issue. Game Stop has shown the industry the profitability of the used market and now they aren?t the only ones trying to capitalize on the idea. Best Buy, Gamefly, and other companies are starting trade-in plans that threaten to cut in to industry profits in the years to come. The used game market is growing not decreasing, and that $2.62 billion this year could be $4 billion spread over multiple companies in the years to come. So it is an issue of concern. How do you convince shareholders to invest in a plan when there is a good chance you will initially lose money on the investment, which consoles initially do? I think the answer to that is that you show them a $2.62 billion hole in your old system and a way you plan to plug that hole to increase profitability.
@Scorpion1813 Yeah,that's why I said the public was stupid for encouraging it. What's funny is that when the CoD franchise finally starts to stagnate,they'll gripe about it as they did with Tony Hawk.
@ClaudiusCaesar It does make me think. I bought one of my favorite PC games on ebay,and another one that I really like I was simply given to me.(It's pretty old.) It sounds sort of jerkish,but I guess I'll just have to say it,trust me,I mean no offense. I will not concede.I will not be convinced that it is wrong for me to resell what I bought.I will not buy into the baloney that I only own the "experience."If the devs/publishers/etc. wanted me to believe that,they should have made the sale of used games impossible/illegal from the start,instead of giving the market 30 years to construct itself in such a way that we expect to be able to sell them.And why shouldn't we?It's been legal for 30 years. To sum up,it's Gamestop that needs the punishing,not me. Firstly,as I said before,I don't buy their used games because they're only 5 measly bucks cheaper than new,even some time after the game's been out. I only buy used when the game has gotten some age to it,so it becomes harder to find,and so I can save more money. Secondly,this more than limits the sale of used games.It makes them impossible to deal with. What if your console breaks and you get a new one? You'll just have to buy the codes for your library of games to reactivate them. I don't like it.It will only make piracy worse,which will only cause them to lose more money. They just need to work something out with Gamestop to fix their issue.Perhaps limit how soon they can resell new games or something.
I think the console gaming market is only 2 or 3 years from collapsing, it will be interesting to see if any of the big 3 will survive and continue to be a gaming company.
@Wormkid_64: I agree with pretty much all you said. As for the CoD thing though: Yes they are flooding the market with something that is popular as sells well, but that's only because the consumers keep buying it over and over. It's for this reason that companies start worrying less about the quality of games and more about the quantity.
@WCK619 Without knowing what their end plan is you can?t say how things will play out. For all we know they could be designing their own version of a Steam/ Gamefly hybrid, where you can sign up for a subscription and download/rent games and have one rented download on your HD at a time for like $15-20 a month. So where you lose out on the ability to trade games you are actually able to play more games than you do now depending on your gaming habits and budget. Then let?s say if you have the subscription and you decide you want to buy the copy you have downloaded on your drive you pay $30-40. Now that title is linked to your account and you can delete it and redownload it at any time. Now you have a virtual game library kind of like Apple has with your eBooks and you can go in there and click on a game and play. Who knows? But taking used games out of rotation is good for the console makers as well as those that create the content. We live in the digital age, it is time our minds expand past putting priority on disc based content. It is nice to have but once it gets taken advantage of and is no longer about having the security of having a hard copy of our purchase and it becomes being able to profit off of other?s work then they are stepping in to do something about it.
@Wormkid_64 1) Why your friend couldn't play with your account? Does he want to test the game or he wants get it for FREE? Remember, when you borrow a videogame disc you are borrowing a \\$1 disc but GIVEN away for free a \\$59 (or less) content. 2) For a publisher/developer, pirating = used game. Both of them bring \\$0 to cover the production costs. 3) "It means less circulation by word of mouth". You mean "by word of mouth" or by disc. If your friend bought a NEW game and like it, he can "circulate it by word of mouth" a million times. Why people don't complain that they can NOT lend or sell PC games? Why you cannot lend or sell your movies, music, apps and games that you "bought" at iTunes. That's not your RIGHT? Remember, you buy a \\$1 disc by license a \\$59 (or less) game. Simple as that. I hope this make some people to think a little bit. P.S. This whole anti-used game thing is not because people "borrow" to friends, but because Gamestop make sell and buy used games way TOO easy and it became mainstream, taking a big bite (\$2.6 billion) on publishers/developers revenue. So, for that, blame Gamestop (the most lucrative corporation in the whole game industry).
I feel for the console gamers...one thing I've noticed with console online games is unless it's super popular, the servers for online play get shut down fairly quickly(chromehounds etc)...with pc gaming there is always a way around this, consoles your at their mercy and get stuck with useless software.
@ClaudiusCaesar Yes I do.I bought the disc,and the $60 off set the cost of development,production,and distribution of everything from the "experience",to the shrink wrap on the exterior of the case. Selling games is a thing that has been done since the 80s,and the industry has gone on just fine. I made it clear before that I support those who work hard to produce the game by paying for it new.They made their money on that copy.And the trouble here,as I also mentioned before,is that 1: These new ideas would mean I couldn't borrow a friend's game.He has to come to my house and sign in to his account. 2:The devs will only lose more money this way. You think pirating is bad now,if hackers and pirates feel that their rights are threatened,they'll work harder to steal the games. And,not as many people will be able to buy the games. Not everyone can drop $60 every time a good game comes out. 3:It means less circulation by word of mouth,because no one can share the game,and some people can't afford it.And that's how I came to buy Portal 2. I never bought the first one,just played it at a friend's house.That got me hooked,and I payed for the sequel.Same for Mario Galaxy 2.I borrowed the first one from a friend,and so when the second one came out,I sprang for it. So,as I said before,this is not the right solution to the problem of the devs not making enough money.If anything,it'll only make illegal activity worse by making people's favorite gaming companies turn into their enemies.
@lance_7 You claimed what I said "wasn't true at all". Which means I was wrong about there being any other industry that has creators making money off used merch sales. One thing you pointed out earlier actually was a good idea, though. You mentioned that car manufacturers have dealership that buy back used cars. This is a great comparison. And I agree that if game developers want the money from used game sales they should set up a market to compete against Gamespot for used game sales the way car manufacturers set up dealerships that compete for used car sales. There shouldn't be a double standard.
@WCK619 You keep playing make believe. I'm the one who originally said that you can't compare software to all this other crap you keep trying to compare it too, so of course there is a double standard. The point was that games are software and trying to justify a used market for software is basically idiotic. The same way there is no used market for Norton or Windows 7 or iTunes. I've told you no lies and I'd love for you to show me one. The only one you are fighting here is those voices in your head.
@Wormkid_64 Really, do you think you are buying a \$1 disc? You are buying the content. Skyrim, Assassin's Creed, MW3 and others are \$60 on Steam (no disc). Also, if we want to share, bring the disc to your friends and login with your account. But, resell it? It's not fair to those that WORK hard to produce it.
@lance_7 Why aren't you making the case then that game developers should just open up their own market for buying/selling used games the way car manufacturers do? Ohh what's that? There's a double standard you delightfully embrace? None of this has done anything to prove me wrong. So I'm still waiting for that apology. Your refusal to accept responsibility for your lies has lead you into justifying your garbage with more and more garbage.
@ClaudiusCaesar Just one more comment. See my comments to Scorpion1813 to see that we're on the same side. I hate piracy,and I want the devs and publishers to do well,but not at the expense of gaming as we know it.I want to be able to share my games and movies,I want to be able to save money.So rather than make it harder to do those things(thus increasing piracy and other forms of theft)they need to make it easier to buy,share,and own games,and harder to illegally copy them.I know it's a tough battle that frankly,will not end.There will always be hackers who want to break the devs security,but they'll just have to keep fighting it.Making used games unusable will only make pirates more common.
@ClaudiusCaesar That is digital content,which,requiring no physical media,is cheaper and easier to produce and distribute for the devs/publishers.So that makes it cheaper for us,meaning we don't need to buy it used,because almost anyone can afford a 5 to 25 dollar downloadable title.And,being tied to an online account,we can go to a friend's house and still share it with him by signing in on his console. The only downside to digital content is that it's harder to keep safe than a physical disc,which can be stored safely on a shelf,while digital content is only as safe as the devices that store it,and if anything happens to those databases,you may lose it.So you've got to pick your poison. And,for the record,I don't just buy the "experience".I buy the disc too.It's mine now,and I can sell it.If the "experience" happens to be tied to the disc,it gets sold too. If I only bought the experience,my friend would have to pay the producers of movies,or publishers of games before coming to my house to enjoy them or borrowing them to use in his house,because I wouldn't be authorized to share the "experience" with him.That's something they wanted to get off the ground with Blu-ray by tying each copy of a movie to the first player it gets used in.Fortunately,they failed at that,and with any luck,they never will succeed.
@Scorpion1813 In the end,I believe we are on the same side.We're both gamers,and neither wants to see our favorite companies go under due to a lack of funds.But we want to be able to afford gaming and share it with our friends,which is something we could not do if a game became directly tied to a console.(This excludes digital games,which,being cheaper,preclude the need to save money by buying used,and if tied to an online account,can be enjoyed at a friend's house.)
@Scorpion1813 Such as candy bars and individual bottles of water in a 24 pack. Of course,I'm 100% against piracy,hacking,and all that other garbage.That's plain stealing,and devs/publishers lose lot's of money to that. But they should tackle that,not the sale of used games. BTW,when I talk about buying used games,I guess I'm a little different than everyone else. I don't mean the ones you see at GameStop for $5 less than new.In that case,I'd buy new and avoid any kind of scratches and what-not.I'm talking about buying games at places like Disc Replay(a resale shop in my area for all things electronic,from games,to music,to movies,to consoles and players,etc.)where I can save up to 50% on a game if it's old enough(so,not available day one or even week one.).So I guess that's more like your idea of buying and selling directly to other people,as that's what this store does,buys your game(at a much better price than GameStop will give you I can say with certainty.)and sell it on to other gamers.And that's it.They do not have new games alongside used ones. Your example of CoD is an example of a stupid populace being duped by a company that has admitted to flooding the market with what is popular until it isn't anymore in order to make money. I.e.,the Tony Hawk series.
@WCK619 Okay, this is kind of ridiculous. You ask me to name one industry that profits from the sale of its used merchandise, I do that, and you claim it ?redefining the meaning?. How is it redefining the meaning? Did I say something untrue here? You claim it is ?moral superiority?, I just think it is common sense. I don?t know you and you don?t know me. For all you know I club baby seals for a living. I have no desire to prove my ?morality? to you. I thought we were talking about used games.
@lance_7 Nobody is forced to sell their used car back to the manufacturer. You might as well tell game developers to open up their own market of buying/selling used games to compete with Gamespot. Wow, that is a really weak argument. You have a massive double standard for game developers. I guess I should have expected that from you by now, but you keep surprising me. You're attempts to weasel out of my question are getting more pathetic than I ever would have anticipated. You are going to twist things as much as you possible can aren't you? Move the goal posts, redefine meanings, wild interpretations, anything you can possible do to not accept responsibility for your terrible claim. You DO owe me an apology for falsely accusing me. But I can see that moral superiority complex is just growing bigger now.
@WCK619 I told you specifically what I meant and you prefer to act as if I?m ?weaseling out? of the question and that I owe you an apology. The funny thing is the most common example on here is the most obvious answer to your question. You want to know what industry has the [creators] of an item profiting from used products. The car industry. Everyone wants to bring up cars like it is a perfect example. Guess what, it is a horrible example across the board. How do most used cars get into rotation? It is by trading in a used car when purchasing a new one. Guess what, there are manufacturer owned dealerships that profit off of used cars. So are you now going to apologize to me or are you simply going to not respond.
Why are RFA moaning? They made a sequel to a game and left the best parts out. Hint: The best part of Red Faction Guerilla was? The multiplayer. What doesn't Red Faction Armegeddon have? The multiplayer. (the real competitive kind...aka multiplayer...the other is called...co-op). So the reason for RFA not working is because of used game sales? No. Most people should realize that most problems start between the ears. For RFA, the group think that allowed the best portion of the game to be brainstormed out of the sequel is the reason the game didn't sell many. People need to call out the idiots who make crap games...who then use the...it's the people who buy used who are the problem. No it's the idiot devs stupid decisions that do it. That's a fact. Yeah and the reason the world economy is falling apart is because people are reusing mouthwash, carpooling, and only using the ipad2 instead of preordering the new one....not the big banksters and their completely fraudulent practices and extortion of gov't (and people) worldwide being the M.O. of the imperial monetary system.
@lance_7 so you still can't name any other industry making money off of used merchandise sales? And you still won't admit you were wrong? As much s**t as you throw around or twist to try and avoid the question, you can't find another industry that has even TRIED to demand a cut of used merch sales. I was correct. No other industry does this. You falsely said it "wasn't true at all" and can't back up that claim. You really ought to apologize, but obviously you're just going to keep weaseling out with some moral superiority complex.
@WCK619 I think you misinterpreted what I was referring to when I said what you wrote wasn?t true. You made a comment that contained a few points: [quote]Almost every industry has sales of used merchandise. There's an effort to combat pirating, but none of the other industries are so destructively trying to combat used merchandise sales or demanding a cut of it.[/quote] I say this isn?t true because there is no used market for current software. Everything is a licensing agreement. Also, movies and music are doing all they can to get as much as they can out of their merchandise and combat piracy. Movies and music are going digital as much as possible and they?ve gone so far as to cut features from rented copies of blu-rays, which is exactly what is talked about happening with Sony and games in the article. So for you to say neither industry is ?so destructively trying to combat used merchandise sales? I beg to differ. Both industries are constantly looking for new ways to combat it and are actively trying new approaches. They aren?t trying to get a cut of used sales, they are trying to destroy them all together. They just call it something you can better identify with, like a ?Zune Pass?, or iTunes music store. Those things are ways to get people to pay for music that they attempt to keep you from being able to sale used.
"Sony's PlayStation Vita can already identify secondhand games and prevent players from earning trophies with them." After looking this up, it seems to be that this is only an anti-cheating measure, not about blocking functionality because it had been used. If you can get trophies after wiping the memory then it's only to prevent people from sponging off others trophy progress.
Nintendo, if you are reading this. Do not follow Microsoft and Sony, everyone will have your next console, and you will be filthy rich.
I remember reading something like this years ago before the PS3 and 360 were announced/released. I remember thinking how much it would suck if my friend let me borrow his game and I couldn't play it. Thankfully they were just rumors and never came to be. The only way this is in effect is with online passes with games i.e. Battlefield 3. It just isn't logical. Renting/borrowing games would be impossible.
Game industry should stop whining. Period. On the other hand, Gamestop isn't entirely blameless. They do encourage pre-orders, but they shouldn't stock used copies so soon after release. Perhaps if they impose a three-month or so window from a game's release, that could help things. However, Gamestop should be the ones taking punishment, not the end-user taking the product home. Things are getting ridiculous. I have yet to purchase an online-pass game. They also need to tone the freakin budgets down. If they can not deliver a good product without an overly inflated budget, then they suck. It is that damn simple. They should not punish me the customer because they made the choice to spend all the money on the game. You don't see the movie industry charging $5 to see something like "The Vow" and charging $20 to go see "The Avengers" just because one of them obviously costs significantly more than the other. It is time for the game industry to become accountable. I think someone said it best when they said they usually are excited for E3, but this year they dread it. @NeilCardiff No, they aren't entitled, apparently we the consumer are the ones with entitlement issues. The consumer doesn't have a right to a full product upon paying his/her \$60. *sarcasm*
I can't move on to the next generation of consoles because it's too expensive. $300-400 is a lot of money! Because of this, I choose to game on a PC. Digital copies are fine, as long as I can still play them offline.
@ Claudius Ceasar Yes but you can still sell them and make money. howbout a digital form of trading and currency. Oh you dont think its reliable enough? Well then why would you think the digital medium itself is reliable? Why is it a 1 way transaction? Its too lateral, It removes too many other options while only gaining a few. I can sell a dvd I buy I can sell a TV or a car, Why not my games? It doesn't make sense but it must be necessary if their actually doing it. The industry is evelving and digital information saves alot of actual resources in alot of ways and its just more efficient. That seems to be the direction we're going everyone will just have to evolve with it. its a brave new world ;)
The console makers will do what their 3rd party software makers want because it's the games that sell systems. With that, the publishers don't see the used market as a problem, they view it as potential market share. There is also, realistically, going to be little backlash to the publishers/devs imo. The people who buy new will continue to do so. Yes, you will cut off a great deal of used product purchasing players from the market, but a percentage will swap and buy new (it's the only option) or "unlock" used games. These converted players equate to new revenue for publishers...either way it's win-win for them. What it will do is hurt the players in the wallets, the retail outlets that supply the used games, and the console manufactures when less hardware is moved due to unhappy, alienated, used game players not finding the value in purchasing a new console. Notice pubs and devs are not on the list.... I, for one, will be holding onto my existing system until it dies...
@SnuffDaddyNZ You can NOT compare a physical things to a videogame (or any IP). Physical things wear out and get damaged.
@ClaudiusCaesar Yeah you add $0 to development when you buy a used game, but the person that bought it first did, and by the way development costs should be included in the pricing of a game - games are WAY too cheap tbh.
USED CARS. That's my entire argument summed up in two words. In fact, I'm gonna add two more words to it :- USED EVERYTHING.