MS??? Steam deals?...Not unless the lord struck them.

A lot of people quoted you on this, so I'll quote your original.

Gamers are Drug Addicts. Like noname said, a lot of people pay for XBLG, even have XBLG subscriptions, and barely use it. Plus a lot of the more core gamers, buy more then they play. I know when 360 first came out, I bought a lot of good games at the time for $20 each (like Devil May Cry 4, or Ninja Gaiden 2) only to play them for a few hours and leave them on the shelf collecting dust. I still have yet to beat DMC4, and it's low on my TDL, should of held off buying it.

Charging a fee for used games isn't really that bad for developers, but what is bad is charging full retail price for it. Full XBL retail which is way overpriced (Halo 3 and Fable 2 are still $35 on XBL, I can buy them for $15 at a store).

All this is going to do is make people buy less games (which furthur hurts small developers), reduce the number of retailers (since stores rely on used game sales to keep them in buisness), and give a small boost to profits for the devs.

This is just a bad idea in my books, but I wouldn't oppose a $5-$10 charge on used games, that would give devs significantly more money per game sold, still keep retailers in buisness, and still keep game prices as is, thus letting gamers buy what they want.

Not really, particularly when it came to Steam.

THe companies already make 50 dollars for every 60 dollar game sold. 5-10 bucks? We already are being charged for the used game, should there be another fee on top of whatever the store or person charges? Istn that what online passes were? 

Well, i sell alot of games and i always use that money to buy other games. Make of that what you will, but i know im not the only one.

Companies make 80% the games value, so when the game sells $60 retail, that's $48, when the game is $20, that's $15. Before devs used to get zero dollars, making 20-66% of that they would if used games didn't exist is better then zero, and this will unaffect peoples buying habits.

Thus devs get money, retailers sell just as many games (with a smaller profit margin), and gamers buy the same number of games (except those who sell their games to buy new ones, since their games value is less).

Sure if used games had a full MSRP, they make more money per game, but that will seriously hurt retailers (since they make a large profit off used games), and that could negatively impact gamers because they will buy less games, especially if MSRP prices on XBL are similar to the One as they are on 360 (Halo 3 and Fable 2 are still $35, what a rip off)

---

I'd rather have nothing, I'd rather have online passes, but devs are getting greedy, and I'm just offering a more viable solution to the extreme full MSRP used game fee.

Because they would have less word of mouth on there games which actually depends on stuff like 2nd hand gaming and renting. While lesser known franchises would suffer far more if second hand had a huge fee on it or was blocked. The industry is just better off just keeping this 2nd hand business as it has always been. I would probably have played less than half the games i have played if it weren't for second hand games. Also, how do we get older games if they do this? They won't still be making new copies of PS4's or Xbox one's launch titles in say 2020, it makes no financial sense

Yeah, but by then they'll try to sell you a "virtual console" copy of the game for the next system! lmao

I just perfer to actually own my games. And what if collectors want this games in the future? they will be unplayable unless someone ends up hacking the anti-used games thing, which is inevitable

Not necessarily

Selling an old game and then using that money to purchase a new one is at its core, a financially smart decision. Doesn't necessarily mean that the individual requires the funds from the sold game to buy the new one. I.e they would have bought the new game anyway. Also that money may well go back into the used game market, or something else entirely.