This whole hating the used game market is BS. EVERY market has a secondhand market. ALL of them. So, why don't you hear, say the car industry, complaining about used cars sales? It's because they aren't dumb, like some game developers, or gullible, like some gamers who have been tricked into hating Gamestop. They know that the people who sell their new cars usually put that cash towards another new car, which makes them more money. Sure, there are many people that only buy used cars, and the car manufacturers don't see any money from those sales. But, they don't care because with how many used cars are available, there are just as many willing to buy new.

This is no different from the gaming industry. The developers lose ZERO money from the used game sales. In fact, it only benefits them. Just as with cars, many use that cash from selling games to put towards buying more new games. Also, people who buy used games will probably be more inclined to purchase the DLC for that game, something the original purchaser would have never done, which makes the developer more money in the end.

Online passes and/or tying a game to one's account is BS, too. The person who originally bought that game for $60 paid for the right for that game to be played online, no matter who's hands it ends up in. It's only one copy of the game, therefore only one person can play the game online. This is another example where the developers are not losing a single dime on online, but are either dumb in thinking they do, or have tricked gamers into thinking they do.

The car industry knows that sales would slump if used cars were killed off, which is why they don't care. I suggest the game industry wise up to this, too. The only thing they need to worry about is making quality games and keeping their time/resource management in check, and they will be fine.

Easy. How many times you think a person buys used rather than new? People just want to save a few bucks and not only that, gamestop rewards you the more you do buy used. So People like my brother buy used instead and play the games in like a week, finish the game, sell it back. So how many times does a used game get bought rather than a new game and only for $5 bucks cheaper. I see it all the time. How many rounds does one used game make in gamestop. 2-3-5-10-20. C'mon are you really that blind to  see it heavily cuts into there pockets. As I explained earlier, put codes in the game and you could register the game to your account and maybe they will allow some sort of friend friend link thing on xbox, alowing for your friends to play your games. However if you don't have a code. $10 - $15 charge. However the code would only reduce what you get for the game and also what gamestop would get. You would still be able to sell and their would be a kick back for assholes like my brother. LOL He don't understand he's hurting the shit out the same games he loves.

Why does it hurts smaller devs MORE than big names is what I want.

I want an argument that states that it it used games that killed these devs off and not dev costs.

im pretty sure theres gonna be alot of trouble if they try to block used games. At least in europe they will be steamrolled in court. The industry is becoming way too greedy.

The answer is to scale back the graphics.  A game that is going to sell 20+ million copies can afford to have the best of the best graphics.  If your game is going to sell more like 500K or 1 million, the investment the publisher makes into the game needs to be smaller.

One word, Darksiders.

I will respectfully disagree with you. I think my code system allows second hand sales, while supporting developers that want to go against the grain. I don't want the same sh-t, over and over. A $10-15 charge to buy second hand would really only come out of people selling the game, not people like me who keep there games. Also MS or whoever could come up with a buddy system. Like you get 10 buddy's you get to share all your games with and they also get to share games with you if they decide to also be your buddy. Their  are many different ways of going about it. Also would have friends selling their games to friends and take gamestop out of the middle.

You  do have some valid points but I also think I do as well.  I like different games. I get sick up the same sh-t all the time. What you are forgetting is the small developer is the one getting destroyed, they have no chance unless big companies pick them up. New companies need to form to form competition. This gen, how many software companies got bought up. So now we got the same massive company dictating whats going on. This charge would allow small developers to continue what they love and invest in the game, so we get stunning games and the developer only has to sell so many rather than what Dead Space 3 needs to sell. 5 F'ing million to break even. thats to much. If they sold a million cars of one model. GM would be shitting breaks of GOLD. Other markets have way higher profit margins.

Company's strive on preowned games, it's unfortunately a no win situation

You're going to have to provide more words, because I don't know what you're meant to be arguing against with a reference to Darksiders.

Most small developers seem to be doing just fine. It's the THQs, the Factor 5s, and the Krome Studios. It's rather uncommon for small studios to fold - they're more likely to be bought out by publishers than fold. Many small developers also make use of digital distribution, which provides them with a lot more exposure than they otherwise would have gotten. And most of them sell their games for far less than the big studios do, too. The thing is, those small studios can sell 50k of games at $10 each and make a profit, while the huge studios sell 1.5 million $60 games and still don't break even. Like I said, the problem is in the growth of development costs, not used games.

Arguing that used game sales are the cause of the problem is like arguing that the reason why so many American banks did what they did and caused the GFC was because they weren't making enough profit from their regular activities. And as so many have already pointed out, used game sales actually bolster the industry, by providing early buyers with the money necessary to buy more games. If you were to remove used game sales, in all seriousness, you'd see a massive drop in game sales, as the biggest gamers become a lot more careful with their purchases, find themselves only being able to afford a few games a year,  and all the other gamers being restricted to just a single game because they can't afford to pay for a lot of games at full price. The used game buyer is actually subsidising the new game buyer, who then buys more new games.

In fact, the biggest impact of banning used game sales would be to create havok in the industry as only the biggest titles would sell - the rest would end up staying on store shelves, because people can't afford to take risks. CoD would sell more, while games like No More Heroes wouldn't even make a mark.

As for the idea of your "single-use code for any used game", there are multiple problems. One, how do people without internet use the code? Two, why wouldn't pirates just crack the code - I'll tell you right now, a lot more people would be happy to pirate the code than pirate an entire game. Three, why wouldn't this just strengthen gamestop, as private used game sales would become less appealing (due to not having an appropriate code to go with it)? Four, why should the single-use code be the same price irrespective of whether you're buying a $60 or a $20 game? Five, what happens in 5 years time when the codes are no longer being generated? Six, I don't have to "unlock" my car when I buy second-hand by paying the original maker, why should it be any different for a game?

To put it bluntly, it's just not workable. It would be wieldy, and not much different from, for instance, Ubisoft's DRM. It might be a little more streamlined, but it still suffers from the major drawbacks that other DRM suffers from.

On the other hand, if you make games that people want to keep, it benefits you when you sell them, because those games become rare on the used game market. The result is that the price that places like Gamestop charge for the used copy is much closer to that of the new copy, and people just opt for the new copy anyway.

Something to consider - Skyward Sword currently costs US$50 new from Gamestop. It costs US$45 used from Gamestop. Saints Row The Third for 360 currently costs US$45 new from Gamestop. It costs US$35 used from Gamestop. Why did it drop in price, when Skyward Sword is still selling at full price? Why is the used price for Saints Row The Third even lower relatively speaking? Not only do Nintendo titles hold their new prices a lot longer, but their used prices stay up near their new prices, too. Why is this? It's because people who buy Nintendo titles are holding onto them, and so the used game market doesn't get filled with copies. Nintendo doesn't have a problem with used game sales, because their games rarely end up on the used game market, until a long time after release.

Will a little more than 1/3 seem be ok with some form of code or whatever to stop second hand games. That might be enough to convince the others if the system is not to crazy and allows for some freedom.

I update the thread, oh and go buy Dead Space 3. Not only is it a great f'ing game, it needs to sell 5 million games. If didn't have second hand games, I don't think they would need to worry at all.