I disagree and I will tray to give a example.

+ Mr. Z buy a new game A
+ Mr. Z play the game A (and maybe buy DLC)
+ Mr. Z sell the game A to Mr. Y
+ Mr. Z buy a new game B using the money of game A
+ Mr. Y play the game A (and maybe buy DLC)
+ Mr. Z play the game B (and maybe buy DLC)
+ Mr. Y like the Game A
+ Mr. Z sell the game B to Mr. X
+ Mr. Z buy the new game C (a sequel of game A)
+ Mr. Y buy the new game C (because it loved the game A)

... it is a circle that gets bigger and bigger.

Used sales generates more new sales... news games sells more due the economy of the used market.

If the Mr. Z didn't sell it used game maybe he won't buy a new game.

It's just that even without used games the developers became money hungry and would never stop to maximize their profit.
If people think episodic titles or DLC is worth it, then they will buy it, even though it's most likely a scam.

Fact: If you make games that people don't want to sell when they're "finished" playing it, it fixes everything. This is Nintendo's approach, and if you have a look at the used game market for first-party Nintendo titles, the vast majority of them have prices only very slightly below the price of a new game... in which case, new copies get sold. Notice how most "evergreen" titles are Nintendo titles?

So what you are saying is that developers should forget about anything that does not make the consumer want to keep their game. Hmmmm I can see a lot of genras going belly up with that fact.

If developers and publishers want their games to retain their value and not appear in the used game market, they should focus on making them in a way that encourages keeping the game. This isn't achieved by DRM, online passes, too much focus on online modes, etc, but by making a quality game that the player will want to return to in 6 months time, through deep, fun gameplay.

Hmmm, so DLC, MP, MP only, Forget all singleplayer games where the user can complete in a few days no matter how good. What exacly more do gamers want then a good game.  How much do the developers have to give and keep giving to make gamers appreciate the hard work that goes into giving them their experience.  I remember a time when Epic use to give away so much content for free.  One time they charged for something and the communitty went bananas.  Its like this company gave the community stuff because they wanted to but when they needed to make some money the community turned on them like a rabid dog.  I beieve from there I have not seen any such love from Epic since. On another note,   you are making a statement for what we see today right.

It's also worth noting that the gaming industry's biggest problem isn't used game sales, it's an obsessive focus on major existing IP, sucking each one of them dry of value and then discarding them. It's the videogame market equivalent of the oil companies. Compare with what Nintendo is doing - yes, they're making big-budget titles like Zelda and X, but they're also making games like Yarn Yoshi and Dillon's Rolling Western. They make the major titles, and they also make lesser titles that are cheaper to produce and provide more variety. And they provide appropriate levels of marketing (usually - Wii U marketing so far notwithstanding). And they have reasonable expectations of sales numbers - they don't release Metroid games expecting 10+ million sales just because it had a bigger budget than the previous one.

Interesting you should use Nintendo because if any company has used their IP the most is them.  The thing is Nintendo is not a 3rd party publisher.  They role their own console and people purchase a Nintendo console to play Nintendo games.  Its not even new games people look for in Nintendo but the same Ips they have been playing for years.  So maybe all the publishers should make games like Big N and keep pushing those puppies out.

The gaming industry complaining about used games is like America complaining about illegal immigration as the cause for the massive and growing debt crisis - not only are they unrelated "problems", but proper understanding of the one would help to resolve the other.

So your conclusion is that used games have no inpact on new game sales.  Consumers trade in their new purchase to purchase a new game with that purchase.  Or could they trade in that new purchase and get a 2 for one used game deal at gamestop. Hmmm, 2 for 1

Here is my scenario

MR. Z goes to gamestop and purchase a game.  
Mr.Z finishes the game in a week
Mr.Z sees poster from Gamestop saying "Trade in this game for instore credit"
Mr.Z goes to gameStop trade in game, Mr.Z thinks about getting a new game but there is another poster saying 2 for 1 used game purchase.
Mr. Z goes for the deal.
Clerk says if you get this powerup card, you get 10% on used game purchase and your purchase today goes towards points for rewards on teh website.  Also you get game informer for 75% off.
Mr.Z thinks thats great and sign up.
Cleark ask MR. Z if he has any games on this list that he could get 50% more for his trade in.
Mr. Z looks at the list and see a number of games he has he can trade in
Mr.Z bring those games in trade for instore credit and then client says, you can use your rewards to get 5% discount on a used game.

Now MR.Z is no longer thinking about purchasing a new game because Gamestop has made purchasing used a better proposition.

I probably would go on and on but this is the experience I have seen at gamestop more than the hypothetical one you present.  I have seen your argument from a few people but I highly doubt that it’s the norm.  If you sell your game to someone, you probably going to spend it on a bunch of different things and a new game is probably on a list of hundreds with a used game above the new if its cheaper.  The facts are that used games are a billion dollar industry where companies like gamestop makes huge profits from.  If gamestop is making those profits then someone else isn’t.  You couple that with grocery stores, and every other outlet selling used games now things start to become a problem.  When the scale of used games was small, your scenario definitely probably helped the industry but today such things have changed and every retail outlet is looking to make money like Gamestop.

or as nintendo put it, if other devs made great games people would not trade them in as much so others have to buy new.

What makes you think that these developers are money hungry? Many of them are just doing what they need to survive. Developers who take risks are closing down left to right such as team bondi. They are just doing what they need to succeed. Episodic content is used to keep gamers from selling their games. Of course this may not be true for all developers, but it is unfair to group them all together as being "evil".

wow this is an original thread. used games is how i roll. too bad soo sad. take them away then much less dlc and much less games giving the industry as a whole lot less money.

no arguemnt will ever convince me or many others that POV. but keep making the pointless threads i guess.

The cloud is pretty cool. I love being able to back my saves up onto PSN and clear them off my HDD until I need them later, or have it safe in case my system bites the dust. Don't let Microsoft scare you off of it just because they're a bad company.

Um... of course I have proof. People do it every single day. I've done it. Are you denying that this is something that happens? What do you think Gamestop sells as their big launch events? Used copies of games that just came out? You can argue that it doesn't happen often enough, or that Gamestop has scuzzy practices in pushing used games over new at every possible turn (I'd agree), or whatever, but it is a real thing.

If publishers and developers have a problem with Gamestop trying to push used over new, that's something they need to take up with Gamestop. Attacking their consumers is the exact wrong thing to do, and yet it is somehow their very first inclination. They treat their customers as if they are somehow addicts who will take any amount of abuse just to get their fix, and to a greater degree than I am comfortable with, they are apparently right.

Ridiculous game budgets are what's preventing publishers to take risks. Not used games.