Buy used? Can't complain.

[Quellist]

To the OP

Seriously dude, stop whining, most every other product in the world that can be reused IS reused and the manufacturers dont whine about it. The games industry is one of the most bloated and greedy around, on a par with hollywood if not worse and apologists like you only make things worse.

 

[Frostbyte666]

OP your rant just screams of the copyright infringement messages you get on legally bought dvd's which annoy the heck out of me. I buy both new and used games and each has their place for me.

For new games, even though they are more expensive, I buy them because I have either been waiting for the particular game for a while, trust the developer to give a good experience or have heard genuinely good things about it from friends. (e.g. Skyrim, go Bethesda)

Now onto the used games, these are cheaper and the reason I buy them is that I see a game that looks interesting and decide to take a risk, if I like it then I may pay more attention to that developer when their next game comes out and would probably buy new. The other reason would be older games that I may have lost or can't find anymore for new and get them through the used sales. (White Knight Chronicles, and unfortunately a huge letdown and glad I didn't give money to the developer for it).

This brings us onto a new way for getting games, digitally distributed, now this is excellent for older games or classics because though personally I prefer having the physical product the cost of it sometimes is absolutely shocking (Tales of Vesperia springs to mind). so I get it digitally and the developer still gets some coinage rather than people who have jacked up the price to obscene levels and reselling it.

In conclusion no I don't see used games as harming the industry if I didn't buy used I wouldn't have gotten certain games in the 1st place and thus wouldn't have gotten a few gems from certain developers, bought new. Also yes I do believe I have a right to complain about shoddy games even if I bought them used, because I think thank god I didn't waste even more money on a bad product and if you want me to consider anything from them they'd have to fix this, this, and that.

 

[ExileNZ]

God, not this again.

Look, dude, Jim's arguments may be flawed or repetitive, but here's the thing:

Libraries.

I could end the whole argument there, but let me remind you of something: Game stores make most of their profits on resale. Back in the day, they made maybe 20 bucks on the sale of an Xbox. The 360 is unlikely to yield much more, particularly now that it's getting on a bit and is therefore cheaper (but only for you - it still costs the same amount to make).
So, shut down used games sales and you basically shot down the outlets that sell games.
I may be a fan of Steam, but I like to be able to install a game without waiting for hours while it downloads. Also, if you shut down game stores, Origin will grow - at least Gamestop doesn't pre-install spyware.

Also, the buck does not stop at Gamestop. If I buy a game (used or not) and show it to my friends, they sometimes get interested. If I don't already have a cracked ISO on my hard disk, chances are much higher that they'll buy it too.

This is called word-of-mouth, and the entire book industry is held up by it (see again: libraries).

Ever heard of the Baen Free Library? Baen distributes a CD of a huge chunk of their works in every book they sell (they're also available online now). Why? Because chances are if you like their older stuff, you'll just go to the library (you get the point). But when the new one comes out, if you're hooked, you're much more likely to buy it off the shelf. It's not a guarantee, sure, but customers are selfish arseholes by nature and we have every right to be (just so long as we're not rude to the people behind the counter).

I'm not sure at what point lending games effectively became illegal, but you try that shit with books, DVDs, music or any other media and watch the fireworks.

 

[Hairetos]

I feel bad for you OP, I really do. It's like people didn't even bother to read the bolded parts of your post before posting. They do a gut-reaction of "Buying used is plenty moral!" when that's only a part of your post.

Essentially, you are right. Say there are 100 people in a room, 80 of which bought the game used and 20 of which bought the game used (obviously made-up ratio). Now say that the 80 pose a change to the developers that the other 20 disagree with. Why should the developers listen to those who gave them no money? If the other 20 agree with the change, then it doesn't really matter anyway.

Now obviously I'm overlooking a few things. For example, if 45 new-buyers want a change and 35 new-buyers plus the 20 used-buyers don't want it, the numbers get hairy. Furthermore, used game sales can become future new game sales, but the point is that those who don't directly support the developers can't complain when their voice isn't heard. Their opinion, by default, will be significantly less valuable than loyal customers, which is a well-known fact.

So that's your choice, I guess. You get to pay higher price when buying it new and have receptive developers or get it cheaper and have the developers never see your money (not that they can tell who buys used or new, but if they could...).

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

I feel bad for you OP, I really do. It's like people didn't even bother to read the bolded parts of your post before posting. They do a gut-reaction of "Buying used is plenty moral!" when that's only a part of your post.

Essentially, you are right. Say there are 100 people in a room, 80 of which bought the game used and 20 of which bought the game used (obviously made-up ratio). Now say that the 80 pose a change to the developers that the other 20 disagree with. Why should the developers listen to those who gave them no money? If the other 20 agree with the change, then it doesn't really matter anyway.

Now obviously I'm overlooking a few things. For example, if 45 new-buyers want a change and 35 new-buyers plus the 20 used-buyers don't want it, the numbers get hairy. Furthermore, used game sales can become future new game sales, but the point is that those who don't directly support the developers can't complain when their voice isn't heard. Their opinion, by default, will be significantly less valuable than loyal customers, which is a well-known fact.

So that's your choice, I guess. You get to pay higher price when buying it new and have receptive developers or get it cheaper and have the developers never see your money (not that they can tell who buys used or new, but if they could...).

I know he is saying in a nut shell, if you buy used you have no right to complain about a game. But the thing is if you buy a game used and didn't like what it was like, and your complaints weren't listened to and hopefully changed. That company still lost a customer, and low chance he will buy the game new anyway. I HATED Saints Row 1 when I bought it used but when I saw the changes made to Saints Row 2 I bought it twice(For Xbox 360 and PC). No one's opinion is less valuable, ALL CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM IS USEFUL. That just sounds like a elitist thing to say "The use game market is less then new game market".

As I always say, used game sales can lead to new game sales (Hell I hated Atlus but one used purchase of a SMT game and I'm a Atlus fanboy).

EDIT:Also if used game sales are so bad, explain why Gamefly is legal? If you can't explain why it is legal then this argument about used game sales has no ground for you.

 

[darthotaku]

you mean just like you can't complain when your car stops running because you bought it used? or when someone can't complain because the most important page in a college text book was shit on because they bought it used? sales of used objects exist because they still have value after the original owner is done with them. the games industry aren't bitching because they aren't getting money, they're bitching because other people are getting money. it's like the whole gold farming complaint. it doesn't do anything to the developers, but they'll be damned if they see cash changing hands if its not their hands its going into.

 

[Pearwood]

If you only purchase used games, you have no right to complain about those games.

The used games market severely damages the industry because it deprives the developers of any and all support.

The games publishing industry is being very immature lately. You say they have no reason to listen to me, I say I have no reason to pay extra. Both are true but developers often pay attention to feedback and since I've played the game and know what it's like I'm perfectly qualified to give it. Your argument also hinges on the fact that people complain about used games to the developers directly, not true in most cases. And besides, if I paid money for something I'm not satisfied with I have the right to complain about it.

I also take issue with the second part I quoted. The used games market is nothing compared to the market for used films and I won't even mention used cars, used hardware and all of that stuff. If the publishing industry has problems with their income you can't blame used game sales or piracy, the sales model for products like this has always been to make the vast majority of your profit in the first month before used game sales or piracy even start. After that it's a matter of choosing a £20 product over a £35 product, assuming the £35 product has no incentive to make me spend that extra money it's an obvious choice.

Put simply, in much the same way publishers and developers put their income before anything else I put my money before their concerns.

 

[surg3n]

Isn't the fact that the game is even available pre-owned a testament to how good it is?

If someone buys a game, hates it, then sells it - does their opinion count for more, than the guy just trying to save a few bucks, maybe he needs to buy food as well. The developer already got paid for the game, the game is now in the hands of someone else - do the developers expect to be paid again, because the first owner thought the game was shit? (hine, the answer is fuck no). The industry has changed very little in 30 years - there have always been pre-owned games, games for hire, piracy, yet the industry is still going. They are using pre-owned games as an excuse to introduce new payment measures, like online mode licenses, DLC costs, and god only knows what's comming next.

Frankly I'm sick of the industry whine about pre-owned games, I'm sick of the whine about pirated games, I'm just sick of the god damn whining. What are we supposed to do? - put Gamestop out of business? - you think Gamestop or anywhere else would survive without the income from pre-owned games?. If game stores stop, then us consumers would suffer.

The industry right now is trying to make us pay more, as if we don't already pay too much... What the industry should learn is that if we get sick of them, we have options, we are the consumers and we hold all the cards. They should shut the hell up, or the money I'd use to buy my next game will go on waffles, and I'll download the damn torrent and get the same experience. I like to maintain a collection of games, my steam account is not a proper collection, collections go on a shelf - yet when you have steam, you have better piracy protection, version control, very low distribution costs, yet the prices are still too steep. For years the high cost of games were blamed on production costs, retail costs, and only a piddly little percentage made it back to the developers. Absolute bullshit - if that was the case, how come downloadable games aren't much cheaper!

I call bullshit on the whole industry, and I paid for my opinion by spending thousands on videogaming over the years, supporting an industry that does not appreciate us.

 

[Zukhramm]

If anything the people buying used is the people companies should listen to, if they want to stop used sales. If you don't want people buying used, then listen to those who do and their reasons the game is not worth full price.

 

[DEAD34345]

Actually shops buy the game from the publisher, who buys the game design from the developer. So by that logic, the only person who has any right to complain is the publisher?

When you buy a game pre-owned, you're really just paying the shop, which paid the original owner, who paid the shop, which paid the publisher, which paid the developer, so your opinion is apparently invalid.

When you buy a game new, you're really just paying the shop, which paid the publisher, which paid the developer, so surely your opinion on it is pretty much equally worthless... ?

Why does the number of steps along the line to getting the game to you have any effect on the worth of your opinion, exactly?

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

What about libraries? Rental places? Why the fuck are games special when it comes to this argument?
And ignoring feedback on your product is just bad business sense.

 

[babinro]

When developers here complaints and criticisms about their product. They do not investigate whether the source of those details come from used or new game buyers.

From a developer standpoint, the comments made by used gamers hold as much weight and influence as those made by new game purchasers.

You may feel that this practice is closely tied to theft, but the fact is buying used is still helpful for the gaming industry. People who buy used (or rent for that matter) are more likely to try products they would never have played at full price. If they enjoy these experience they may eventually buy future releases new. This practice leads to new sales that otherwise wouldn't have existed. In this manor it benefits all parties.

Finally, if developers/publishers want more people to buy new. They simply need to place more pressures on selling their games at lower cost shortly after release. Release a game at $60 but drop the value in a shorter time frame than they do. Why keep it $60 for years before going to $30 or $20 when if you did so in a matter of 6 months you'd retain far more new purchases throughout the lifespan.

 

[Ranorak]

You didn't buy our product directly, so now none of your observations, arguments and conclusions are valid, because we care more about our profit then reflecting on our playerbase and hearing potential improvements.

Also, Where do you think that extra profit goes that Gamestop or whatever makes on second hand games?
Eventually it will find it's way back to the developers.

The more profit a store makes the better it can; advertise, hold sales, open new locations, hire more staff, etc, and that improving the consumers way to buy video games and thus, investing in new titles.

Yes, some of it might go to the new car of the CEO but that's why he runs a store.

 

[Arafiro]

I can't say I have a great deal to add, but I totally agree with you OP.
I don't see buying used as a lot different than pirating. The developer certainly doesn't.

 

[Benni88]

This thread has got trolls-ville stapled all over it, but I want my say to be frank.

I'm working a full-time unpaid placement at a small dev studio in the UK and honestly, I cant afford to buy new releases. Frequently I buy pre-owned games so that I can stay up-to-date with conversation and see what some of the triple-A studios are doing.

I don't think that this inhibits my ability to make constructive remarks about the games I play, in fact, I'd go as far to say that it makes me a bit more savvy in terms of what I'm prepared to buy new and the standard I can expect from different developers.

I've seen the level of work that goes into even smaller titles so I fell for developers whose games are not well received, but when it comes down to it, it's an object in the public domain, as open to criticism as films, music, literature, celebrity lifestyles and political exploits.

 

[Rude as HECK]

\In the eyes of the game industry, buying used is one step removed from outright theft because it involves the distribution of their hard work and does not involve getting paid for it.
(Moreover, the practices of stores like Gamestop are getting closer and closer to outright theft as it is.)

And in the eyes of the barber, having long hair is theft. So what?

The entire line of "But developers don't get paid" is flawed; never in the history of anything has "not being paid" been a definition of theft.

I take it you are opposed to used book sales, also? Or does this magically only apply to games?

One final point: in discussions like this thread, it's common to look to what the industry says to judge what measures are "needed" to protect copyright, or sales, or whatever.
No. They are the ones with the vested interest. Just as you don't ask the barber if you need a haircut, you don't ask copyright holders if there needs to be more protection for copyright. Same in this case.

 

[Sparcrypt]

THATS the fucking difference - Gamestop actively created a model out of directing people away from new games to buying used copies - there is no other industry where a major supplier actually does that. Hence why its completely different.

You sir, are absolutely correct. All those 'used car' lots you see around are just your mind playing tricks on you. They certainly don't encourage you to buy from them instead of the dealership!

You mention that it's rare to see a used/new mixed car lot in the USA, as if that somehow matters... does that mean if I buy my games used from a store that ONLY sells used games it's somehow different?

If you think that retailers are under some OBLIGATION to sell new items at all costs before directing them to the used stuff you have no clue about business. Gamestop do not try and sell preowned games because they hate the gaming industry and want it to die. They do it because it is the sale that is of the most profit to THEM, which is all they care about. It's also the only thing games publishers care about, same as every other business.

While I was at uni, I worked in a games store and we pushed people to get preowned over new as much as we could. Know why? If we didn't we would have gone broke. Do you know what the profit margin is on a brand new game for a retailer? A grand total of bugger all. Almost all the cash goes to the publishers, not the reatiler. Used games however have a good profit margin in them, so the business can thrive. This is the same reason warranties and other crap (known as 'addons') are constantly pushed on customers - these are where gamestop and other games stores actually make money. The new games sales are basically nothing.

So you can easliy argue that by refusing to buy new games you are directly hurting the retail industry! Oh no!

Finally here is a solution to this 'problem' the industry has you all convinced it has: if you make good games people will buy them new and never trade them in because they want to keep them FOREVER.

..

As someone who buys almost all their games brand new, I'm tempted to shift to preowned only as this idiotic argument is just getting annoying.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

If giving money to a company is enough to get them to listen to you then all games would be made by the fans.

Listen to me very very carefully:

Giving money to a company is the only way to get them to listen to you.

No, you'll be listened if you have something worthwhile to say, not only if you spend 60 bucks on a game regardless of what you're saying.

No, you won't.

If you do not support the developers with your dollars, your opinions have literally no value to them.

That is how capitalism actually works.

No, only the stupid and destined to fail companies wouldn't take good advice that comes from someone outside of their customer base.


Buying is indeed a show of faith but not all buyers have worthwhile advice to offer or logical demands to make, this is why things like Dragon Age 2 came out even though the original game's fans didn't want anything like that and they DID make that original game a huge hit so if you were right DA2 wouldn't exist.


Here's the core flaw of your argument; if only money is something that may make people notice your opinions, companies will always just go for the next, bigger pile of money which is NOT the actual people who purchased their stuff since they're already that much more likely to buy their new things too. No, if that's how the company acts it'll go for new and bigger audiences, it'll go and try and do things they think those new audiences would want until it reaches a state where they're making CoD money by not changing anything and most of them never will.

So, if we're going by your logic, to have an opinion matter you shouldn't actually give money to a company, you only have to show promise that you will if they do what you want. I don't need to tell you what's wrong with that I hope.

 

[Panorama]

Don't really agree. Playing the game determines if you would buy a fresh new copy of another game they make. Used games, thus cheaper, is a good way to hook a new customer. But then, game companies have awful publicity. The thing is, a good or even just a cheap game is rarely sold after purchase. And since good and cheap games are so rare these days...well...you see my point.

That said, I never bought a used game (If I'm bored, I want to play a game now not in a few weeks and I don't even have a Gamestop around) but ...developers still don't listen to my complaints and those that I know who agree with me. I might as well be pirating for all that they care.

Snip


Well, yeah i bought assassins creed second hand and bought the rest new, it got me into the series for cheaper i enjoyed so i bought the rest full price.