Maybe if videogame developers didnt think they were working on the next big fucking Hollywood blockbuster, they wouldnt need mediocre games with small fanbases to sell 10 Million units.

The best way to increase profit, would be to actually start making videogames that people want to buy. Gaining consumer trust would be a start.

Stop cloning Call of Duty. Stop putting out unconvincing videogames. Stop developing games for 4-5 Years at a time. Stop putting out overpriced, shitty DLC. Stop putting DLC on the fucking disc. Stop advertising your product as something that it quite clearly isnt. Make a compelling product.

These companies need to stop blaming the consumer and look closer to home for the problems.

There is a reason why the Indie scene is doing so well right now. Its because they release new, good videogames, that dont cost a lot to make... And are worth the price you actually pay. Its controlled development and the likes of EA and Square Enix could learn a thing or two.

They have never been rights. They have been privileges. Digital game purchases are not resellable and nobody complains. You know why? Its because reselling a game you've bought and played is not actually a right. And IMO, I'd rather accept the used game policy than let the gaming industry die. That's just selfish.

I am very tired of reiterating the same counters to these same claims over and over again, but here goes. We do not exist to serve the needs of the developer. They exist to try to please us. It is not our responsibility to manage their business and make up for their inability to properly manage their finances and growth. And yes, they actually are selling us a disc. Unless you're going to try and tell me that when I buy a DVD, I don't own a digital video disc, but a 'license to watch the movie,' which would be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. We never heard a peep from them about disliking the used game market and how it was so amoral until they discovered a way to block it out or take a piece of the pie themselves.

And don't try the excuse that we don't complain when PC games have DRM-no one liked it there either, and it's why PC games get pirated exponentially more often than console games.

The long and short of it: if you don't think what they're doing will affect your buying decision, more power to you. But to try to spin this into anything that can be remotely positive for the consumer--that is just incorrect in every conceivable way.

Which was what exactly?

How do you share? 

well, it is correct that more money for developers means obviously more money to invest in games and an easier way to take more risks with games which could be a hit or a flop. if that is the only way for developers to stay alive is something i don't believe because they just will release asscreed and cod 25 to stay alive.

but the reason why developers don't take many risk anymore is because most oif them are already in the red and every flop could be their end. we just have to look at the financial data of companies like ea, ubisoft, take 2, they make a loss even with their big sellers. take 2 made a loss last year with games like borderlands 2. i believe ubisoft made a loss, ea makes often a loss... the only publishers which are really healthy right now are activision and maybe 2-3 others.

if developers have more money (if that would be the case is another question but they think so), they can increase the quality of their portfolio. i always wonder what gamers think why publishers want that. because for more money right? didn't gamers realize all the problems the gaming companies had the last years? do they think it will be easier next gen with probably even higher development costs?

No one would feel like they need to sell their games after they finished them if those games weren't disposable crap.

Developers "sometimes" get a bonus if a game does well. However, the developer gets paid a SALARY by the PUBLISHER who reaps the reward of the vast majority of a financial success. The publisher is also the one that takes the hit if a game does not do well because they came up with stupid policies (DRM, Online Pass, Rinse, Lather, Repeat (game dev cycle), copy another game, lock disc based content) then they blame it on the developers for not making the game great, and second hand sales as if all those second hand sales would have been full retail purchases. The majority of resale at GameStop goes towards a purchase of a NEW game. Used games that cost $5 - $10 less than a new copy don't sell well. Some people only get interested in a franchise/game/developer after trying their products via older used game or rentals causing them to buy a NEW game of that same type.

Used games only help the industry overall. Yes the industry is changing, but that is more so due to new technologies than lack of interest in gaming. Blocking used games will only hurt that companies reputation and earn them the scorn of prospective consumers.

maybe consumers should stop asking for always better graphics then? people even complain already that xbox one is too weak and some even say that about ps4. but the same people don't want to pay for those extreme costs developers have because of that. they don't want dlc which is a way to get the enormous costs back, they don't want drm, they don't want higher game prices. gamers are against everything which could help developers but they still ask for "more power" all the time and already laugh about the possible graphics of xbox one. 

indie games are successful, but how many of them? don't you think for every successful story there are minimum the same amount of people who tried but failed with it? it's not as if we get 5000 indie games and all make a profit. you just don't hear about the indie developers which failed because they are all only a few guys big and nobody will talk about them. many guys just make an indie game in their freetime. if it's a success it's great and if not then, well, they still have another job... people who work for bigger developers or publishers don't have that. if they aren't successful they lose their jobs. but it's not easy to be successful with those costs you have nowadays. 

This.

Game developers and publishers need to stop trying to shift the blame to the consumers all the friggin time. Rather they should make compelling products that people want to keep. Used games are a good way of ensuring this. If developers know that people have the option to trade in their games then there is more reason for them to try and make a product that has more value and will keep the consumer engaged for a long period of time. This in turn will lead to better gaming experiences. If not, devs have even more opportunities to make mediocre games that the consumers are stuck with. Look at Aliens Colonial Marines. I'm sure Sega would have liked it if there was no used game sales for that game.

Developers need to stop prioritising on pretentious crap that doesn't add much to the gaming experience. We don't need to see every single hair follicle on a person's body if it means the devs are going to go bust doing so. Indie games are constantly putting out good looking AND innovative gaming experiences at the same time by budgeting correctly. There is a reason why Nintendo 1st party games have been selling well for decades. It's not because they have been blocking used game sales. It's because they have their priorities straight and they understand that people play games for the gameplay experience, not to watch 5 hours of CG rendered cutscenes out of a 10 hour game. Then Square Enix wonders why they aren't making money. Even COD, yes COD does so well because it prioritises gameplay. People like to constantly hate on it by saying how crappy it's graphics are, but the developers at least understand that COD's success lies with the fact that the game runs with a butter smooth 60FPS and it's multiplayer experience, not because of how many polygons are on the screen. I don't see COD having problems with used game sales, because peope like to keep those games for the extensive MP mode that gives them fun for a long time.

If there are no used games, it won't just literally mean that every person will now start buying games new. No, people will just end up becoming more vigilant about what games they buy, which will just reduce game sales. People will also be much less willing to take risks and try out a new franchise like they may do now when buying a cheap used game, which could potentially lead to them buying sequels new. There are many factors here at play and it's not just a simple correlation of No Used Games=More New Game Sales.