If GameStop's used game business had never existed, would we have DLC in the same aggresive manner to which we are being subjected to, possibly getting DLC for most games?

The fact is that some publishers and developers have expressed that GameStop business of retaining all profits from sold used games, take away possible profits from brand new games that could be bought by consumers that do leave the publishers/developers some profit.

Microsoft initially had a vision for the Xbone that involved some more steps at the moment of selling your copy of a game to a retailer that sort of guaranteed the publishers/developers some profit during the transaction, but that initiative never took off due to negative reception.

DLC has been a sort of walk around to get more profits out of games and try to keep that bought copy on the hands of purchasers.

So I ask you, do you think that if GameStop had never relied in the used game business, would developers still had gone for as much DLC push as they do now?

Do you think even with no used games they would go for greed and seek even more profit by turning game content away into DLC? Or do you think no used game business would make a difference?

Would no used game business make it harder for companies to get away with so much DLC?

What do you think?

DLC was a natural evolution of the want for more money as that exists in any business. However, you raise an interesting point. Although I'm almost positive DLC would still be around despite a used game business in the shape of GameStop's, I think it may have taken longer to get to the ridiculous levels that it's at today.

Dlc is a method to ensure every consumer pays something to the actual publisher. I STRONGLY agree with this.

However, what id rather see is every game giving day one dlc free to pre orders. Punish the cheap fks that buy used or wait for price cuts while rewarding people that pay full price.

As soon as consoles finally get to a predominantly digital state... the future of gaming can FINALLY move foward. As much as people raged about the original XB1 vision... it was actually pretty sweet (coming from a sony guy myself). Seeing cheap digital purchases --- and being able to borrow and possibly resell digital games? Hell yes. Fk Physical... it needs to die.

It probably wouldn't be as intense, and day 1 DLC/on-disc DLC probably wouldn't be as prevelant as it was today.

DLC would still be a thing, though.

I honestly believe thats one of the main reasons for DLC being ridiculously bad, publishers like EA and activision would probably still use them if the situation was different though.

Personally I despise the used games market, I see them in the same light as piracy, since the biggest reson for paying for a game is to support the developers.I agree with what sabvre42 said, developers should give day one dlc to people that pre-order or buy the game day one, but it has to be something actually good and worthwhile to make people buy the game for full price, not a damn weapon skin or costume.

I also loved the XB1's program to get rid of used games, but it was ahead of its time thus why it failed.In a decade I bet most media will be distributed in a similar way to what MS proposed, hopefully by then digital will be dominant in consoles, and developer can finally get paid for their work.

It's only a matter of time before it no longer exists, so we'll find our answer. Most likely yes, though.

I dont quite agree with you.First, the people who wait for a better price on a said game are not at fault.From a business point of view, they(the companies) did not make their product atractive enough to make people buy day one instead of waiting for prices to drop.Second, is not everyone that has alot of money to afford on buying game every month.Today, i can buy 2 games every 2-3 months(at full price), but when i was younger, i relied on christmas and my anniversary for my games.

Moving to the point of the thread, no, i dont think used games was at fault for the rise of DLC.I mean, sure it may have speed up the process a little, but we would eventually had DLC.As someone said before, it is the nature of the business to seek new ways to make more money.Im not against DLC, im just against how most of the companies use them.

They would still go for DLC's but not on a grander scale as it is now. Without used game sales impacting them as it's doing now, most of them won't have the need to increase their profits drastically. However, they will find another excuse to justify such practice. They'll probably blame the weakened economy or something like that.

That was kind of my point ...

Paywall a portion of the game (just add on content ... not main story) as DLC but give it for free to people that preorder the game. Basically, I think more games need to do the Elder Scrolls Online / MKX (goro) thing. Give people that pay full price more content, and people that wait have to spend more money to get the same thing.

No. Though I voted that I like DLC (seriously, I've yet to play a game that requires it for a complete experience, and I simply don't buy DLC that isn't worth it to me, and when it is worth it to me I'm glad they made it), it's mostly because if GameStop didn't have a used games business, some other company would have filled the void (not to mention it would have done much better than GameStop, and would have eventually swallowed it up anyway).

The used games business has always and will always be a natural extension of the physical games market. Without an official market, people would simply find ways to sell or trade the games themselves. The schoolyard, work, pretty much any place where people gather can (and have) been used as places to trade and/or sell games. eBay is a huge hub for used games sales. Places that now sell retro games would (and typically do) naturally sell used copies of the newest games themselves, because their BUSINESS is used games.

So, I mean, the answer to this is not even in question. If GameStop didn't exist, and used game sales were what caused developers to turn to DLC (which, let's be honest, it didn't, because DLC is also a naturally evolution of the games market and was coming no matter what) gamers would have simply found some other avenue to deal in used games.

So...yeah, we'd still have as much DLC.