By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Anti-used gaming policy is good for gamers.

papamudd on 08 June 2013

Funny how used records didn't break the business, or mixed tapes, or copying tapes, or used tapes. Or how vcr's ruined movie sales since you could record and re sell indefinitely.... no its was cd's... and drm saved the music industry... because the other mediums that had a second hand market didn't count..... it couldn't possibly be the vast number of big time producers over spending on projects that did way worse than expected, or that the consumer market was moving at a faster technologically savvy rate which lent itself to a new medium for music (digital) that the business wasn't ready for with distribution or effective markets set up to meet that need. NO, it had nothing to do with any of that it was because people sold that current medium second hand like they did will all previous mediums, but that specific one ruined the music industry...



Talal said:
I will permaban myself if the game releases in 2014.

in reference to KH3 release date

Around the Network
chapset on 08 June 2013

They really want to push gamers into the 1$ games on iphones and tablets that's where the really money is apparantly



Bet reminder: I bet with Tboned51 that Splatoon won't reach the 1 million shipped mark by the end of 2015. I win if he loses and I lose if I lost.

arcane_chaos on 08 June 2013
Yakuzaice said:

I'm not sure that I get these posts that suggest the industry is going to crash if the used market continues.  First of all, the industry is much broader now.  Even if the $100 million blockbuster market crashed, there would still be an avalanche of games being made.  Second, I don't really see Microsoft's scheme bringing in a substantial amount of money.  At least not enough to go from "industry crash" to willing to take risks on massive AAA games.

Last year Gamestop sold $2.43 billion in pre-owned merchandise.  This is not just xbox games, but also consoles, accessories, handhelds, and Nintendo software.  Even if Sony followed suit, how much money would we be talking about?  The US is 70% of Gamestop's overall revenue.  Let's say PS4/One software might eventually be half of that pre-owned figure.  We're already down to $851 million.  How much will the publishers take, 25%?  Now it's down to $213 million.  This in a market that was down $3.74 billion at retail last year.

Now obviously Gamestop isn't the only used game market in the US, but it is the most significant one.  Their used sales were down last year as well, so it's not like you can blame the decline on that.  Also about $760 million in trade ins went towards the purchase of new products.  So even if killing used had no adverse effects, we'd only be looking at a 6.7% increase, in territories where they operate, from cannibalizing Gamestop.  This also assumes the plan will work (or even be legal) in places like Japan, Europe, and developing countries.


LISTEN TO THIS MAN!!!



scat398 on 08 June 2013

Your response shows know understanding of the either the movie or music industry, all those technologies at some point in their life cycle became a problem to the industry.  Technology is always changing and those that would choose to pay nothing for a service will always look to take advantage of the technology.  And those that wish to profit from their work will attempt to use technology to protect their product.  The fact is technology is again giving those that produce the actual product the ability to protect their work against those that would steal it from them with little or no compensation.  



Hynad on 08 June 2013
Euphoria14 said:
Carl2291 said:
Maybe if videogame developers didnt think they were working on the next big fucking Hollywood blockbuster, they wouldnt need mediocre games with small fanbases to sell 10 Million units.

The best way to increase profit, would be to actually start making videogames that people want to buy. Gaining consumer trust would be a start.

Stop cloning Call of Duty. Stop putting out unconvincing videogames. Stop developing games for 4-5 Years at a time. Stop putting out overpriced, shitty DLC. Stop putting DLC on the fucking disc. Stop advertising your product as something that it quite clearly isnt. Make a compelling product.

These companies need to stop blaming the consumer and look closer to home for the problems.

There is a reason why the Indie scene is doing so well right now. Its because they release new, good videogames, that dont cost a lot to make... And are worth the price you actually pay. Its controlled development and the likes of EA and Square Enix could learn a thing or two.


Yes. Pretty much this. I couldn't agree with you more, Carl. Very well said. 



Around the Network
925azn on 08 June 2013
scat398 said:

Your response shows know understanding of the either the movie or music industry, all those technologies at some point in their life cycle became a problem to the industry.  Technology is always changing and those that would choose to pay nothing for a service will always look to take advantage of the technology.  And those that wish to profit from their work will attempt to use technology to protect their product.  The fact is technology is again giving those that produce the actual product the ability to protect their work against those that would steal it from them with little or no compensation.  


Are you comparing pirated music/movies vs pirated games OR ... are you comparing pirated music/movies vs used games.  Totally different but it appears many make these unfair comparisons.  



thekitchensink on 08 June 2013
youarebadatgames said:
thekitchensink said:
I am very tired of reiterating the same counters to these same claims over and over again, but here goes. We do not exist to serve the needs of the developer. They exist to try to please us. It is not our responsibility to manage their business and make up for their inability to properly manage their finances and growth. And yes, they actually are selling us a disc. Unless you're going to try and tell me that when I buy a DVD, I don't own a digital video disc, but a 'license to watch the movie,' which would be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. We never heard a peep from them about disliking the used game market and how it was so amoral until they discovered a way to block it out or take a piece of the pie themselves.

And don't try the excuse that we don't complain when PC games have DRM-no one liked it there either, and it's why PC games get pirated exponentially more often than console games.

The long and short of it: if you don't think what they're doing will affect your buying decision, more power to you. But to try to spin this into anything that can be remotely positive for the consumer--that is just incorrect in every conceivable way.

People didn't like Steam at first, but now it has probably done the most of anything out there to decrease piracy.  The only people who still pirate are the ones who will never pay for it anyways, and are willing to risk using a crack.

If you don't like the price of admission, don't buy the system, don't play the games, and go build your own DRM free console.  Bitch all you want, but voting with your wallet matters, and I bet nobody will give a shit in a year once these consoles get released because it's all talk no action like the COD boycott that did jack.

Steam is completely irrelevant to this discussion--it is a digital download platform, and here we are discussing items that you go to a store and purchase.  I seriously hope I don't need to explain the difference.

And I will be voting with my wallet.  As an avid Xbox fan since the launch of the original, you can bet I won't be buying this anti-consumer piece of trash.



Could I trouble you for some maple syrup to go with the plate of roffles you just served up?

Tag, courtesy of fkusumot: "Why do most of the PS3 fanboys have avatars that looks totally pissed?"
"Ok, girl's trapped in the elevator, and the power's off.  I swear, if a zombie comes around the next corner..."
Dark_Lord_2008 on 08 June 2013
herzausstein said:
"Developers are not selling discs, they are selling entertainment experiences. It's only right that they be able to charge per experience given"

So what you're saying is that we no longer are paying money to actually purchase a game. Rather we are spending 60 (or likely 70 dollars for this generation) for an extended rental. If this is the case count me out.

$60 to $70 for an extended rental for a game that you do not technically own and can not transfer ownership via selling it or giving it away. 



DevilRising on 08 June 2013
20happyballs said:

I'm tired of everyone getting all worked up about Microsoft's used game policy. It's for the developers. It's not like it's greedy for developers to ask of this. Developers are not selling discs, they are selling entertainment experiences. It's only right that they be able to charge per experience given, not the physical discs sold. No one seems to have a problem with app store games not being sharable. 

In all actuality, an anti-used game policy is what is needed to keep the gaming industry alive. We all know that with improved graphic fidelity,  the cost to develop a game will also increase. Consequently, game developers will need to find a way to be able to continue making a profit. The most obvious way to address this increase in development costs would be to increase the selling price of games. However, many of us would respond badly, myself included. Sure people will still buy games brand new when they are first released, but it is likely that more and more people will start to wait for these games to become cheaper and buy it used. Which means that any increase in revenue brought on by the increased sales price would be offset by gamers waiting to buy games used. 

In the end, it is not only the developers who are going to lose out, but also gamers. The increased difficulty for a developer to turn a profit will means less AAA quality games, less new IPs, and developers taking less risks overall. We're already seeing the affects of increased development costs in the current generation. Why do you think so many developers are making first person shooters? Why do you think that many developers are making sequels instead of new IPs? 

 

 

 

 

 

Answer to OP: No.



oniyide on 08 June 2013
Slimebeast said:
I agree with the OP 100%. The used games market must be crushed so that developers get more revenue and better budgets to create even better games for us all.


too bad thats not what is going to happen. First off, developers will get no more money. Publishers will, get that part right before you say anything. 2nd off, if anything everyone will get less money as less people will buy games because they will be less valuable by default. If anything games will get worst, since they'll just make the same crap that they know will sell.