A solution to the problem of used game sales?...

[Raven's Nest]

My response: the day they go DD only is the day I stop buying, unless everything settles on an average of, say, $5 on launch. If I'm going to rent something, I'm not going to pay purchase price.

Well this is the point of the thread. Perhaps gaming could end up being a lot cheaper by renting instead of buying. I'm just suggesting if the individual distributers decided to become the sole renters of their products you would eliminate the problem of hardworking developers/artists/writers/producers not being paid the money they rightfully deserve.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

My response: the day they go DD only is the day I stop buying, unless everything settles on an average of, say, $5 on launch. If I'm going to rent something, I'm not going to pay purchase price.

Well this is the point of the thread. Perhaps gaming could end up being a lot cheaper by renting instead of buying. I'm just suggesting if the individual distributers decided to become the sole renters of their products you would eliminate the problem of hardworking developers/artists/writers/producers not being paid the money they rightfully deserve.

If you think getting rid of physical media would do all that, you've got a lot more faith in humanity than I do. Without physical media, there's no need to lower prices to get old product off the shelves. Now, currently the various DD stores have periodic sales in order to compete both with each other and with retailers, but what do you think will happen when DD becomes the norm, rather than exception? Especially with the publishers being the direct conduits through which these "rentals" take place, meaning they'll have a complete monopoly on their own games? I'll give you a hint: the direction of the price won't be down.

 

[Raven's Nest]

Edit: also, there's no such thing as "sufficient DRM." You get rid of physical media, and piracy will get worse, not better.

If all this SOPA etc goes through then life will become much more difficult for pirates. I'm not saying pirating will go away. But I can certainly see it becoming less of an issue within the next ten years, which is when I think my proposed system might come into action.

Basically this is the debate. Do we the consumers get the power, or do the producers get the power?

Us owning a physical or relatively permanent copy of a game that can never be taken away by a publisher is good for us the consumers.

The publishers having complete control over whether we can play their game is good for them.

As I see it, us the consumers paying once for a game then having it to do with as we will is an uneasy, but acceptable, middle ground. The Publishers get money and have to continue making games if they want more money, and we the consumers can't have the game we paid legal tender for taken away.

Your idea seems more like how online games work, or any kind of game that requires continual upkeep by the publishers to keep running. I'm not saying your idea is inherently evil, but it would be too easy for the publishers to abuse.

But if the price of paying to complete a brand new AAA release is £5 is it worth it? I think so. Like you said, it's not disimilar to how subscription MMO's work. Also someone who pays to rent games is already laughing when he's completeted three new games for the price of buying one.

I use lovefilm extensively. I haven't bought a physical copy of a film for two years but I've watched well over 200 films over the last two years. The cost of renting them is substantially cheaper than buying them, especially when I may have no intention of watching them again...

 

[TorqueConverter]

The idea is growing on me. As long as there are no ethical violations involved with shady TOS then why not adopt a system like this?

I'm going to use Onlive as an example as that is the closest thing we have to a this hypothetical system. Onlive works. It's proof that people are willing to spend 7 bucks on a pass to rent a game or full retail for an unlimited pass to game. It's living proof of concept with the only difference being that the games are not run locally and Onlive is not the game developer of the games they sell.

I can see a system like this working where the user allows a game to be installed onto his/her device then removed once the TOS are up. By TOS I mean the user rents a game for a week for $10 and then is promt'd to pay $50 to keep it or have uninstalled. As long the user is kept in loop and understands the TOS it should be fine. If the user fails to uninstall then fees are charged to their account until the full retail price has been reached.

One of the issues is that a rental system =/= buying a game at full price and then selling it back. I don't think it's going to solve the used game problem. Help? Sure. Solve? No.

 

[SugarSkulls]

Just had a thought. What if The Publishers offered a demo, a server based renting service, and a buying then downloading an end-user copy of the game? It would satisfy so much of this grief.

The people who burn through games would be paying the publishers through the renting service, the people who don't want their games taken away on a whim could buy it, and a demo would ensure people would know what they're paying for.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Edit: also, there's no such thing as "sufficient DRM." You get rid of physical media, and piracy will get worse, not better.

If all this SOPA etc goes through then life will become much more difficult for pirates. I'm not saying pirating will go away. But I can certainly see it becoming less of an issue within the next ten years, which is when I think my proposed system might come into action.

Basically this is the debate. Do we the consumers get the power, or do the producers get the power?

Us owning a physical or relatively permanent copy of a game that can never be taken away by a publisher is good for us the consumers.

The publishers having complete control over whether we can play their game is good for them.

As I see it, us the consumers paying once for a game then having it to do with as we will is an uneasy, but acceptable, middle ground. The Publishers get money and have to continue making games if they want more money, and we the consumers can't have the game we paid legal tender for taken away.

Your idea seems more like how online games work, or any kind of game that requires continual upkeep by the publishers to keep running. I'm not saying your idea is inherently evil, but it would be too easy for the publishers to abuse.

But if the price of paying to complete a brand new AAA release is £5 is it worth it? I think so. Like you said, it's not disimilar to how subscription MMO's work. Also someone who pays to rent games is already laughing when he's completeted three new games for the price of buying one.

I use lovefilm extensively. I haven't bought a physical copy of a film for two years but I've watched well over 200 films over the last two years. The cost of renting them is substantially cheaper than buying them, especially when I may have no intention of watching them again...

What the heck, man? You actually sound sad that SOPA failed. We need less copyright restrictions, not more.

 

[TorqueConverter]

Just had a thought. What if The Publishers offered a demo, a server based renting service, and a buying then downloading an end-user copy of the game? It would satisfy so much of this grief.

The people who burn through games would be paying the publishers through the renting service, the people who don't want their games taken away on a whim could buy it, and a demo would ensure people would know what they're paying for.

That'd be nice. I hate to sit here and champion Onlive as it has it's problems. Onlive allows you to demo any game they have. Quite a few people are creating Onlive accounts just to watch games being played live in the arena or demo some games and turn around and buy them on Steam or Impulse. It'd be nice if these DD store had their own cloud based demo service.

 

[Raven's Nest]

If you think getting rid of physical media would do all that, you've got a lot more faith in humanity than I do. Without physical media, there's no need to lower prices to get old product off the shelves. Now, currently the various DD stores have periodic sales in order to compete both with each other and with retailers, but what do you think will happen when DD becomes the norm, rather than exception? Especially with the publishers being the direct conduits through which these "rentals" take place, meaning they'll have a complete monopoly on their own games? I'll give you a hint: the direction of the price won't be down.

They'll have a monopoly on distribution rights yes, but there is still competition from other developers. If their prices were too high, another developer will lower their prices to attract customers. Can't say i'm very business or economics minded so if it's a horrible idea that dooms the consumer... All the more likely it'll happen lol

 

[Raven's Nest]

What the heck, man? You actually sound sad that SOPA failed. We need less copyright restrictions, not more.

Not that SOPA failed in particular, But I'm all for artists being paid the money they are due.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

If you think getting rid of physical media would do all that, you've got a lot more faith in humanity than I do. Without physical media, there's no need to lower prices to get old product off the shelves. Now, currently the various DD stores have periodic sales in order to compete both with each other and with retailers, but what do you think will happen when DD becomes the norm, rather than exception? Especially with the publishers being the direct conduits through which these "rentals" take place, meaning they'll have a complete monopoly on their own games? I'll give you a hint: the direction of the price won't be down.

They'll have a monopoly on distribution rights yes, but there is still competition from other developers. If their prices were too high, another developer will lower their prices to attract customers. Can't say i'm very business or economics minded so if it's a horrible idea that dooms the consumer... All the more likely it'll happen lol

Competition from the same other developers that essentially agreed on a standard $60 price point? Oligopolistic competition is only slightly better than monopolistic; without the retailers, the prices will not drop the way you think they will. If anything, they'll go up.

 

[SugarSkulls]

If you think getting rid of physical media would do all that, you've got a lot more faith in humanity than I do. Without physical media, there's no need to lower prices to get old product off the shelves. Now, currently the various DD stores have periodic sales in order to compete both with each other and with retailers, but what do you think will happen when DD becomes the norm, rather than exception? Especially with the publishers being the direct conduits through which these "rentals" take place, meaning they'll have a complete monopoly on their own games? I'll give you a hint: the direction of the price won't be down.

They'll have a monopoly on distribution rights yes, but there is still competition from other developers. If their prices were too high, another developer will lower their prices to attract customers. Can't say i'm very business or economics minded so if it's a horrible idea that dooms the consumer... All the more likely it'll happen lol

I like the idea of competition, because it thrusts what we're doing right now from a speculative debate to my business plan of how to rip through the big game companies like a thin light privateer through a fat spanish galleon that thinks being a big floating fort makes it safe from my lean speed and efficient cannons.

 

[Raven's Nest]

Competition from the same other developers that essentially agreed on a standard $60 price point? Oligopolistic competition is only slightly better than monopolistic; without the retailers, the prices will not drop the way you think they will. If anything, they'll go up.

Right now I can rent an unlimited amount of brand new AAA games, three games at a time on lovefilm each month for around £15. Say I played 6 games in that months that would amount to $360!! There's no chance anyone would rent one game for 5 days say for even $30 let alone $60.

If they offered discounts for re-rental and then a decreasing amount to continually rent after reaching certain time points that should be enough to keep hardcore players interested.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Competition from the same other developers that essentially agreed on a standard $60 price point? Oligopolistic competition is only slightly better than monopolistic; without the retailers, the prices will not drop the way you think they will. If anything, they'll go up.

Right now I can rent an unlimited amount of brand new AAA games, three games at a time on lovefilm each month for around £15. Say I played 6 games in that months that would amount to $360!! There's no chance anyone would rent one game for 5 days say for even $30 let alone $60.

If they offered discounts for re-rental and then a decreasing amount to continually rent after reaching certain time points that should be enough to keep hardcore players interested.

I thought you were talking "lifetime rentals." If we're looking at weekly, the day they go to that system is the day I and a ton of other gamers find a new hobby.

 

[Raven's Nest]

I thought you were talking "lifetime rentals." If we're looking at weekly, the day they go to that system is the day I and a ton of other gamers find a new hobby.

What, who offers lifetime rentals?

Actually I'm talking about either renting by meter (like a taxi), for clarification thats you are charged for the time you spend playing the game. Or you could even buy rental minutes that give you x amount of minutes to play a rented games, doesn't have to be the same one.

The business model is sound, the rental industry has been operating for decades. This just cuts out middle men and therefore reduces overheads which can in theory be used to reduce prices. Added bonus being that the development team are earning guarunteed royalties for every time a game is played/rented.

 

[SugarSkulls]

The business model is sound, the rental industry has been operating for decades. This just cuts out middle men and therefore reduces overheads which can in theory be used to reduce prices. Added bonus being that the development team are earning guarunteed royalties for every time a game is played/rented.

I like how you typed, "in theory." Because one of my points is it won't work in practice.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Eternal rental services for intangible goods...scary business.

It's basically the Holy Grail for Publishers, and the Endless Nightmare Scenario for gamers; since most service markets inevitably adopt and implement new ways of squeezing their customers once they become established.

Why? Because even though the Publishers (and their corresponding services) compete against each other, it's much more costly for the CUSTOMER (usually difficult too) to exit a service agreement than it is to enter one, which creates a monopoly-like effect that raises prices (monopoly of time and interest).

I could elaborate, but I don't feel like wasting pages of typing over what is basically an inevitability now. I'll just close in saying that I've seen how abusive intangible/service-centric businesses can become once they get established.
Think: Telecom Giants.

 

[Raven's Nest]

The business model is sound, the rental industry has been operating for decades. This just cuts out middle men and therefore reduces overheads which can in theory be used to reduce prices. Added bonus being that the development team are earning guarunteed royalties for every time a game is played/rented.

I like how you typed, "in theory." Because one of my points is it won't work in practice.

Well there's no proof of that and only a cynical assumption to assume otherwise. Plenty of manufacture's cut out middle men in order to deal with rising costs of goods. These are presented as savings as the consumer is not left paying the full balance of the goods increases. All private and public companies have to display their finances anyway so it would be easy to tell if a company was simply profiteering.

 

[Raven's Nest]

Eternal rental services for intangible goods...scary business.

It's basically the Holy Grail for Publishers, and the Endless Nightmare Scenario for gamers; since most service markets inevitably adopt and implement new ways of squeezing their customers once they become established.

Why? Because even though the Publishers (and their corresponding services) compete against each other, it's much more costly for the CUSTOMER (usually difficult too) to exit a service agreement than it is to enter one, which creates a monopoly-like effect that raises prices.

I could elaborate, but I don't feel like wasting pages of typing over what is basically an inevitability now. I'll just close in saying that I've seen how abusive intangible/service-centric businesses can become once they get established.
Think: Telecom Giants.

I'm not talking about contractual agreements here, just renting directly from a publisher. You could stop renting at anytime. Besides, these are luxury goods anyway no-one forces you to buy them. Better technology, better writing, better designs and better games all cost money. As you said DD is most likely an inevitablity now. Publishers will always need to raise more money from consumers in order to provide more innovation.

It'll be on you as a consumer to decide whether you should part with your cash or not afterall. If anything a rental system gives you full access to a game for as long as you want. If you don't like it, stop playing it thereby stopping paying for it. You would have spent far less money than buying a game outright and pawning it to a retailer for half the price you paid. It'll be in the publishers interest to make games that appeal to players so they'll spend more on the creative team - with the money they didn't miss out on by selling units to retailers and having them circulate the used market for a few years... Win win win as far as I can tell.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I thought you were talking "lifetime rentals." If we're looking at weekly, the day they go to that system is the day I and a ton of other gamers find a new hobby.

What, who offers lifetime rentals?

The entire industry. What do you think they're selling you with that "license" bs?

 

[Raven's Nest]

What, who offers lifetime rentals?

The entire industry. What do you think they're selling you with that "license" bs?

Critical distinction being that you don't continuously pay for a game you've bought (apart from subs MMO's)...