Sadly the average gamer doesn't understand the concept of inflation.
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
This sucks, 3rd party will force Sony and Nintendo down the same path. There are quite a few games I played this gen that I did not buy but borrowed from friends. It is heart breaking to think that something that simple wont be possible going forward.
Why could they not just charge us extra for ps+ or xb-gold and then take a portion of that and pass it on to 3rd party devs vs. the method of adding additional hardware into each vendor store just to validate a used game sale?
This way if you want to buy used games or you are into trade and borrowing you have to pay an extra $2-$5 per month to have that option. Much better method if you ask me. It will also keep used games at a reasonable price vs jacking them up to $40-$50.
This whole thing is the definition of anti consumer, mom and pop vendors won't survive next gen.
So I can't sell myself my game to a friend?
Bad... bad... because I have +- ten games bought from friends... I expect Sony didn't do that.
| Player2 said: "Unconfirmed reports on ConsoleDeals.co.uk suggest that retail’s slice will be as little as ten per cent. That’s a significant cut from what it has become accustomed to from pre-owned sales and more in line with what they would receive from the sale of a new game – hence, the value of the pre-owned market to the retailer is effectively destroyed." "These same unconfirmed reports also suggest that the activation cost for consumers buying or borrowing pre-owned software will be £35." £35 (~40 euros) for a second hand game? And this kills competition from ebay or private sellers so people have to pay what they ask for. Retail gets ~10% of £35 =£3.5 per game. I'm sure stores will be happy with this improvement. I have to assume MS and the developer pays to the stores per game they get traded in, otherwise this smells like bankrupcy.
Now the reaining question is how much money they'll pay to people for their second hand games.
Edit - With this they can charge higher prices for second hand games, and with that first hand games can keep a high price for a longer time. At the ned, only the consumer loses. |
If this is true - Retailers will only get 10% of used game sales, expect a lot of dedicated video game stores to close. They are already losing sales to digital sales on PC and now consoles plus console sales bleeding to mobile and Android devices. There's a very small margin on console sales and not much on new games so they really depend on used games for their proceeds. Cut that down to 10% and it's probably no longer a viable business for many locations.
Gamestop shares plummeted on the back of this news.
Its just greed. Plain and simple greed.
Soka on GAF put it perfectly -
So, to summarize, if I buy an XBone game Day 1 and finish it within 3-4 days, paying $60, I can no longer sell it for $50 to some other guy via Craigslist, but instead will be selling to to GameStop for what I'm guessing is less than $30-40?
And, then the developer/publisher and Microsoft get most of that money, while GameStop, who is actually doing the work involved in the transaction, gets 10%?
So in summary: I've been fucked, GameStop has been fucked, MS and the developer/publisher have made more money... until you consider that instead of me having, say, $50 to spend on another game, I'm only going to have $30-40 to spend.
Let's not forget that Gamefly and the like are now fucked too, unless MS works some sort of rental-version policy out with them... which I doubt they'd do.
crissindahouse said:
it's not unfair, if costs explode because sony and microsoft fans want stronger systems and better graphics, gamers should also pay for it. it's just not possible to make a game like killzone shadowfall for the same money as killzone 1. and since sales don't really increase the extra money has to come from every single game. why is it unfair if you would have to pay more for a game as 15 years ago? do you also get the same loan as 15 years ago? if not, why should you get more money but people working for game studios shouldn't? they also have to earn enough money for their family and they also have to live with inflation which makes their life more expensive. yes, they can decrease costs with better tools and so on but they can't decrease the costs so much to have the same costs as with much less employees who would still earn the same as 15 years ago. not to talk about increasing costs for energy, transport and whatever... what do you pay nowadays to watch a movie in a cinema and what did you pay 15 years ago? movie fans go still to the cinema, gamers don't want to accept higher game prices... |
seriously, who is saying ANYTHING about 15 years ago shit? i'm talking about this used games crap they're forcing on customers. and about game price, what's so wrong about not wanting huge increases/ no increase at all on something already expensive? devs should work within their limits to avoid increases im price.
And another reason why this is just an American box.
What the hell am I suppose to do if there's no Gamestop in my country? or any other big video game store for that matter?
Nintendo and PC gamer
kitler53 said:
you know what else occured to me that is pissing me off about this. say there is a ma and pa type shop that is currently selling used games. first i'm 100% postive they weren't part of the process as MS undoubtedly only asked their "retail partners" aka gamestop. ma and pa shops are basically is at MS mercy to whether or not they can say in business and will basically have to agree to whatever terms MS is willing to give them. some people are saying gamestop must be pissed but i'll bet they are extatic about this. without ebay, craigslist, ma and pa shops, amazon, best buy in the mix gamestop is probably going to have a near monopoly on the used game market. they probably were thrilled to give MS 10% back in exchange for the entire market.. ..and i even if ma and pa shop can get one of MS's propreitary Azure systems into their shop how much would you bet that MS is going to require them to pay for the installation of the server? And how much do you want to bet that server is locked down by MS and becomes a part of MS's could? remember those 300,000 servers MS bragged about for their cloud service? well i can see it now... MS is positioning themselves to get payed twice for the same product. consumers pay to access the cloud that retailers payed to create. |
Exactly this. Don't expect to get a reasonable amount back to finance your next purchase. With competition the trade in value became reasonable over time, not the $5 dollar bullshit, but $30-$40 trade in credit when buying a new game. Forget about that now. No picking up a 4 year old game for $10 either.
- Plus no lending games to family or friends
- No giving away old games when a friend or family member buys a new system to get them started.
- No selling your console with games on ebay or kajiji etc.
And the excuse that game prices haven't gone up with inflation... Well retail/digital revenues have.
Plus digital sales are going up which cuts out a ton of costs. There is your inflation when you pay $60 for a digital download.
Revenues are shrinking now, raising prices or making sales less atractive with schemes like this when sales are declining is not a good idea.
This is either "not an issue" depending on the amount of trade in value games will have, or incredibly shitty. It will all hinge on how much we get for trade ins now.
I'm sorry but how is this genius? It absolutely sucks for people who want to sell games by other means than a GameStop.
Everyone knows that the money they give you is an absolute joke. So now I, the consumer, has to accept and suffer these prices? If I have a game I no longer want that would be worth $20 on ebay, I now have to accept $1.50 from Gamestop instead?
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
