18.6% profits down if no used games

[gigantor21]

noname2200 said:

RolStoppable said:

noname2200 said:

RolStoppable said:
I am still baffled that companies think that changing the dynamics of the used games market in such a way is a good idea. The best explanation I can come up with is that they assume that gamers are like drug addicts, so people will pay whatever they get asked for.

Conversely, this is a market where folks repeatedly spend $60+ on a product they admit they're not really sure they want, and often don't get around to playing. Then there are all those "here's my massive Steam backlog of games I paid for and haven't even tried in X years" threads.

Sure, but that's a minority. If there were really a lot of people like those you mentioned, then the industry wouldn't need to introduce such DRM.

Also, those people you mention are worse than drug addicts, because drug addicts actually consume what they buy.

I'd argue these folks ARE consuming what they're buying. The difference is that they're buying hype and names, not videogames per se. Doubtless there's some shrink out there who specializes in treating shopaholics who can give a pseudo-scientific explanation...

As for those folks being a minority, I'd love to agree with you...but nearly every time I put my faith in the gaming community, I get let down. Paid online, rip-off DLC, high console failure rates, bloated game prices, online passes: all of these and more are extremely anti-consumer, but after initial howls of protest folks demurely buckled in and accepted these as the new normal.

Even DRM has largely met with acceptance; Steam was villified in the early days, since it really is just another DRM scheme at heart, but to hear folks tell it today it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and Valve can do no wrong. I would only be mildly surprised if the newest form of DRM became accepted too, especially if Microsoft/Sony/whoever take some steps to sweeten the pot. After all, they're letting you resell your games in some way/shape/form, so is it really that different than what we have now, when you really stop to think about it?*

 

 

*Yes

You give me entire trilogies/series on superior hardware for $10, when the console versions each cost more at Gamestop, and I'm not going to lose sleep over not being able to trade it in or let people borrow. Especially on PC, where such a thing was usually never an option to begin with.

On consoles, though? Being able to borrow, trade and sell used games on my own terms has been an invaluable advantage over the PC experience. Indeed, the only reason I was willing to try many games this gen was because of that option; there were far fewer games I was willing to gamble full-price on than generations past, and fewer still that actually felt worth the investment. I don't know if that'll be the case broadly, but I know they'll have to do a lot more to get me on board next gen if they're going to restrict those options.