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

Forums - Gaming - UPDATED!!! People like second hand games but software companies can't handle the cost.

 

What should be done?

Nothing, just as long my ... 94 64.38%
 
Block second hand use. only internet access. 8 5.48%
 
Include code with game to... 44 30.14%
 
Total:146
spaceguy on 10 February 2013
Cobretti2 said:
registering is bogus. I don't want my games tied to any online systems mainly because who is to say they will not take these systems down in the future.


I'm saying where you only have to register to your account once. The code would provide the access to the game. Not the internet.



Around the Network
Aielyn on 10 February 2013
spaceguy said:
Selling them back with my brother and them has nothing to do with how good the game is. It has to do with getting money back. Do you get what I'm saying?

I used a example, my brother and his friends. They will finish a game in the first week, just to sell it back. You understand know. Without gamestop, this would not happen at all.

First of all, I'm still not seeing what your anecdote has to do with what I said, except perhaps to confirm what I'm saying - that those games do not inspire their owners to keep the game. I'm betting your brother has a few games that he hasn't sold back to gamestop.

Second of all, I don't see why gamestop is to "blame" for it. If people didn't sell it back to gamestop, they'd sell it to pawn shops, or they'd sell it through eBay, etc.



spaceguy on 10 February 2013
Aielyn said:
spaceguy said:
Selling them back with my brother and them has nothing to do with how good the game is. It has to do with getting money back. Do you get what I'm saying?

I used a example, my brother and his friends. They will finish a game in the first week, just to sell it back. You understand know. Without gamestop, this would not happen at all.

First of all, I'm still not seeing what your anecdote has to do with what I said, except perhaps to confirm what I'm saying - that those games do not inspire their owners to keep the game. I'm betting your brother has a few games that he hasn't sold back to gamestop.

Second of all, I don't see why gamestop is to "blame" for it. If people didn't sell it back to gamestop, they'd sell it to pawn shops, or they'd sell it through eBay, etc.



I get  your point but I see this all the time with younger people like my brother. Your thoughts are only your interpretation of whats happening it's not everyone else's. So in a sense your just guessing whats going on. So my anecdotal evidence has just as much worth as yours.

Before gamestop, software companies didn't have the problems they have today. Also cost where lower. So the only other option is to raise cost or code the game. I rather pay less because people are to cheap to buy new.



spaceguy on 10 February 2013

 

Removed.



spaceguy on 10 February 2013
spaceguy said:
Aielyn said:
spaceguy said:
Selling them back with my brother and them has nothing to do with how good the game is. It has to do with getting money back. Do you get what I'm saying?

I used a example, my brother and his friends. They will finish a game in the first week, just to sell it back. You understand know. Without gamestop, this would not happen at all.

First of all, I'm still not seeing what your anecdote has to do with what I said, except perhaps to confirm what I'm saying - that those games do not inspire their owners to keep the game. I'm betting your brother has a few games that he hasn't sold back to gamestop.

Second of all, I don't see why gamestop is to "blame" for it. If people didn't sell it back to gamestop, they'd sell it to pawn shops, or they'd sell it through eBay, etc.



I get  your point but I see this all the time with younger people like my brother. Your thoughts are only your interpretation of whats happening it's not everyone else's. So in a sense your just guessing whats going on. So my anecdotal evidence has just as much worth as yours.

Before gamestop, software companies didn't have the problems they have today. Also cost where lower. So the only other option is to raise cost or code the game. I rather pay less because people are to cheap to buy new.

This is the problem. Play the game fast, get deals like this.  Don't matter if you liked it or not, your done with the game.

 

Get More When You Trade Toward the Hottest Games Valid 1/7/13 - 2/17/13

Get 25% extra in-store credit when you trade any games toward a new copy of select new games

Tiered Trade Time! The More You Trade, the More You Get!

Valid 1/7/2013 - 2/17/2013

Trade any 2 games and get an extra 10% in-store credit, trade any 4 for an extra 20% or 6 or more for an extra 30%.

 



Around the Network
spaceguy on 10 February 2013
Aielyn said:
spaceguy said:
Selling them back with my brother and them has nothing to do with how good the game is. It has to do with getting money back. Do you get what I'm saying?

I used a example, my brother and his friends. They will finish a game in the first week, just to sell it back. You understand know. Without gamestop, this would not happen at all.

First of all, I'm still not seeing what your anecdote has to do with what I said, except perhaps to confirm what I'm saying - that those games do not inspire their owners to keep the game. I'm betting your brother has a few games that he hasn't sold back to gamestop.

Second of all, I don't see why gamestop is to "blame" for it. If people didn't sell it back to gamestop, they'd sell it to pawn shops, or they'd sell it through eBay, etc.


You don't think urgancy plays a role. I used to sell diamond blades. I used to make people buy blades they didn't want or need and urgancy and deals work. Kids have no clue that they are getting screwed. Their parents buy the game, they get money off it if they beat it fast, that simple. How do you not understand that this is the biggest reason gamestop is in business. Kids are not informed enough to make good decisions. They don't understand there punishing the company or hurting there favorite game makers.

SEE DO IT NOW BEFORE THE DEAL ENDS.

Get More When You Trade Toward the Hottest Games Valid 1/7/13 - 2/17/13

Get 25% extra in-store credit when you trade any games toward a new copy of these select new games.

Eligible Games:

  • Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time
  • Dead Space 3
  • Aliens Colonial Marines
  • Metal Gear Rising Revengeance
  • Crysis 3
  • Bioshock Infinite
  • Tomb Raider
  • God of War Ascension
  • Gears of War Judgment
  • Dead Island: Riptide
  • Pikmin 3
  • Grand Theft Auto V

All great games that should see more sales than they do. How many games do they stop from selling? A lot. They lock kids in the gamer rewards card and than it's better to buy used all the time. So the whole sale angle is to push people to come of their games, Expecially kids who do not know better.



KHlover on 10 February 2013
spaceguy said:
Aielyn said:
spaceguy said:
Aielyn said:
Software giants aren't smart enough to handle the costs. They keep making bigger and bigger games, the costs of development of those games are inflating out of control... meanwhile, titles with smaller development costs, like Just Dance, blossom and make massive profit.

What the software giants need to do is question their development model. Not the sales model - not "blocking second hand games" or "in-game purchases" or anything like that, but the development model, the way that they make the game in the first place.

The answer to second hand game sales is to make games that consumers don't want to sell back to the game store after playing, that the majority of consumers will consider to be worth the full retail price. You will notice that Nintendo never really complains about second-hand titles, and their games mostly tend to maintain their retail prices for years, where most other games start dropping in price within a couple of months of launch. They also emphasise that inflating dev costs is a big problem in the industry. And while they did experience a short period of losses, it was during a period in which the Wii and DS were fading, the 3DS was only just launched and hadn't blossomed, and the Wii U was still in development. They're already making their way back into profits.

And while many studios have been closing, most such studios have been ones working on the 360 and PS3, where dev costs have been out of control, competition has been extreme, and most games are designed to have frontloaded sales - which just encourages second-hand gaming.

I will disagree right away.

My brother and all his friends buy games and play them as fast as possible to sell them to gamestop. It's not that they don't like the game, its that they can get money for it. This something I think people over look. People just want the money, they may have loved the game but finished it fast. I see it all the time. so the developer spends millions to bring a game that they see fit and they get punished because they don't have online like COD, that is always the same. C'mon.

I'm sorry, but... what, exactly, are you disagreeing with?

I didn't say that people aren't trading games in, or that good games don't get traded in. I said that you need to make games that consumers don't WANT to sell back to the game store after playing. That is, games that people play and go "I don't want to sell it, I want to keep playing it, or play it again soon".

It's not about online. People don't often sell back their Zelda games, their Mario games, their Pokemon games. It's not just Nintendo, it's just easiest to use Nintendo examples.

Selling them back with my brother and them has nothing to do with how good the game is. It has to do with getting money back. Do you get what I'm saying?

I used a example, my brother and his friends. They will finish a game in the first week, just to sell it back. You understand know. Without gamestop, this would not happen at all.


You know, you don't need gamestop to sell used games. In fact, gamestop would be the last place for me to trade my games in. Many used games are also sold on Amazon, ebay etc. where you actually recieve the money you deserve. People would sell used games, with or without gamestop. And actually your brother helps the industry. He trades his game in and uses the money he otherwise wouldn't have to buy a new game. I don't see where he hurts a publisher here.



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

binary solo on 10 February 2013
kain_kusanagi said:

Nothing. I own the stuff I buy. It's my right to sell it, trade, keep it, modify it, or burn it in a toaster.

If dev's can't handle the cost of making a game I suggest they stop spending millions developing AAA gambles. If it's unproven do it indie style. That means do the gameplay right, but don't spend too much on presentation. It works in the film industry.

I'm tired of everyone saying that poor game publishers are losing half their money to used game sales. Bullshit! Every industry has used sales yet only video game companies are hurt by them?

The only different between the video game industry and all the others is that they have spent that last decade tricking people into thinking that we don't own the stuff we buy. They did it little by little. First it was Digital Distribution, then it was Online Passes, and now they want to take all our ownership rights and expect us to let it happen because we shouldn't buy used anyway.

Don't let them fool you.

This +1 million.

Online pass I'm OK with if it's to allow use of online play. It costs to maintain online gaming services so everyone who plays a game should share in those costs. If you buy new, then the price you pay goes towards maintaining online gameplay, if you buy used then you should pay your fair share. $5-$10 is fair pay for that sort of access.

I say if retailers are making profits from used games then some of that coin can go to the publisher. It's really one big business screwing over another, so the big boys should fight it out themselves.

Also it's not only game software developers and publishers who have been playing the "you don't own it" game producers of accounting and small business software do the same thing. You don't own that copy of small business accounting software you paid hundreds of dollars for, and we'll take you to court if you try to sell it to someone else even if you never use it and it's remained in its sealed packaging. Oh, and no returns either.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

spaceguy on 10 February 2013
KHlover said:
spaceguy said:
Aielyn said:
spaceguy said:
Aielyn said:
Software giants aren't smart enough to handle the costs. They keep making bigger and bigger games, the costs of development of those games are inflating out of control... meanwhile, titles with smaller development costs, like Just Dance, blossom and make massive profit.

What the software giants need to do is question their development model. Not the sales model - not "blocking second hand games" or "in-game purchases" or anything like that, but the development model, the way that they make the game in the first place.

The answer to second hand game sales is to make games that consumers don't want to sell back to the game store after playing, that the majority of consumers will consider to be worth the full retail price. You will notice that Nintendo never really complains about second-hand titles, and their games mostly tend to maintain their retail prices for years, where most other games start dropping in price within a couple of months of launch. They also emphasise that inflating dev costs is a big problem in the industry. And while they did experience a short period of losses, it was during a period in which the Wii and DS were fading, the 3DS was only just launched and hadn't blossomed, and the Wii U was still in development. They're already making their way back into profits.

And while many studios have been closing, most such studios have been ones working on the 360 and PS3, where dev costs have been out of control, competition has been extreme, and most games are designed to have frontloaded sales - which just encourages second-hand gaming.

I will disagree right away.

My brother and all his friends buy games and play them as fast as possible to sell them to gamestop. It's not that they don't like the game, its that they can get money for it. This something I think people over look. People just want the money, they may have loved the game but finished it fast. I see it all the time. so the developer spends millions to bring a game that they see fit and they get punished because they don't have online like COD, that is always the same. C'mon.

I'm sorry, but... what, exactly, are you disagreeing with?

I didn't say that people aren't trading games in, or that good games don't get traded in. I said that you need to make games that consumers don't WANT to sell back to the game store after playing. That is, games that people play and go "I don't want to sell it, I want to keep playing it, or play it again soon".

It's not about online. People don't often sell back their Zelda games, their Mario games, their Pokemon games. It's not just Nintendo, it's just easiest to use Nintendo examples.

Selling them back with my brother and them has nothing to do with how good the game is. It has to do with getting money back. Do you get what I'm saying?

I used a example, my brother and his friends. They will finish a game in the first week, just to sell it back. You understand know. Without gamestop, this would not happen at all.


You know, you don't need gamestop to sell used games. In fact, gamestop would be the last place for me to trade my games in. Many used games are also sold on Amazon, ebay etc. where you actually recieve the money you deserve. People would sell used games, with or without gamestop. And actually your brother helps the industry. He trades his game in and uses the money he otherwise wouldn't have to buy a new game. I don't see where he hurts a publisher here.



No he usually spends it on used games because of gamestops deals. He is usually able to buy a new game a couple days after release, plays it and then sells it back. It helps his gamer rewards care or whatever it is. The more he buys used the more he gets. So actually he hurts the industry and when he does sell the game back to gamestop, that game on the shelf now takes the place of a new sale, so your logic can go both ways.

So now someone going in to buy a new game, after talkin to the sales clerk who pushes them to buy used, now decides to buy that game instead. Thats a lost sale.



spaceguy on 10 February 2013
binary solo said:
kain_kusanagi said:

Nothing. I own the stuff I buy. It's my right to sell it, trade, keep it, modify it, or burn it in a toaster.

If dev's can't handle the cost of making a game I suggest they stop spending millions developing AAA gambles. If it's unproven do it indie style. That means do the gameplay right, but don't spend too much on presentation. It works in the film industry.

I'm tired of everyone saying that poor game publishers are losing half their money to used game sales. Bullshit! Every industry has used sales yet only video game companies are hurt by them?

The only different between the video game industry and all the others is that they have spent that last decade tricking people into thinking that we don't own the stuff we buy. They did it little by little. First it was Digital Distribution, then it was Online Passes, and now they want to take all our ownership rights and expect us to let it happen because we shouldn't buy used anyway.

Don't let them fool you.

This +1 million.

Online pass I'm OK with if it's to allow use of online play. It costs to maintain online gaming services so everyone who plays a game should share in those costs. If you buy new, then the price you pay goes towards maintaining online gameplay, if you buy used then you should pay your fair share. $5-$10 is fair pay for that sort of access.

I say if retailers are making profits from used games then some of that coin can go to the publisher. It's really one big business screwing over another, so the big boys should fight it out themselves.

Also it's not only game software developers and publishers who have been playing the "you don't own it" game producers of accounting and small business software do the same thing. You don't own that copy of small business accounting software you paid hundreds of dollars for, and we'll take you to court if you try to sell it to someone else even if you never use it and it's remained in its sealed packaging. Oh, and no returns either.

Exactly.