buying used games is stupid

[Xanthious]

Kids nowadays don't like to keep their games and build a collection, they game, sell and trade games on a regular basis. Shops like gamestop are taking advantage of this circular cycle to rip off the costumer. Charging 50$ multiple times on a single copy.

Is it really worth buying a used copy of la noire, deus ex or resistance 3 for 53$? Remember that not a single penny goes to the developers and you're only making gamestop richer.

You guys have several options that are better, imo, like Amazon or other on-line shops. For example European consumers can go to Amazon.co.uk a buy deus ex for 15,99 pounds, that's 25 dollars!
The limited edition of dark souls costs 43?, any physical shop near me wont sell it for less than 60/70?(new or used).

And I'm sure that, regardless of what country you live in, you can find better and more economic solutions on-line.

I think that used games can be a good thing, for example I just bought msg2 and msg3 for 15?, but when it comes to recent ip's I think you should search for options that not only benefit your wallet but also contribute to the industry.

but if you prefer to spend 50 dollars on a used game, that's up to you.
whatever floats your boat...

At least here stateside the reason people buy used is beacuse Gamestop has a seven day (14 in some areas) no questions asked return policy. You know what I get with a new game? I get the pleasure of having fuck all for options if I buy a game and it happens to suck out loud.

So consider this. I want to buy, lets say Battlefield 3, a week after release. I have two options, new for 60 or used for 55. I get it home and decide it's absolute tripe. Now if I bought it new I could take it back to Gamestop and get 30 or so dollars in store credit. However, if I bought it used I can take it back to Gamestop and get a full refund of either my money back or store credit. So you tell me, what is the better deal, paying five bucks more and choosing between taking a 50% loss on my investment or being stuck with a bad game OR saving five bucks and having the peace of mind that if the game if garbage I am free to return it for a full refund? Doesn't seem like a tough choice to me.

Another example. Lets say I want to play a single player game that most people can get through over the course of a weekend. My options are buy it new for 60 and be stuck with it or buy it used for 55 and know that if I blow through it I can take it back essentially playing it for free. Hell if your an unscrupulous person you can juggle used titles for fucking eternity playing a new game every week for a one time 55 dollar investment thanks to the Gamestop return policy.

Bottom line is the developer, publisher, and everyone in between can go find a barrel of sharp sticks and take turns buggering each other with them for all I care about how much money they see when I buy a game. I buy games based on the value I get out of them and used games are a better value because I am guaranteed to either get a quality title or get a full refund. New titles are a 60 dollar gamble that I'm not looking to take when there is a vastly superior option available.

 

[Thaius]

Come back when you have more reasons against used games than, "You support Gamestop." It's not some evil corporation looking to destroy game developers, and that simply isn't a compelling reason not to save money.

As for better options... not really. Equal sometimes, sure, but I have yet to see someplace that consistently offers as good prices, deals, and sales. Stop whining.

 

[geK0]

Judging from the reactions here I'm almost afraid to say it, but I agree with the original poster.

I mean, seriously; games have always been expensive. So claiming that new games are expensive these days is nothing new.

Second, having worked in a gamestore, I know exactly how much money they make on second hand games. And trust me when I say that they make a lot of money on used sales. As a consumer, however, you're getting cheated out of money on every turn. New games were traded in for about 30 to 40 euro's (about half of their original value) while they were placed on the shelve for 50 or, more often, 55. That's a major profit right there and the developer won't see a single penny of it. You may like the gamestore, but I assume you like the developers more, don't you?

My problem with used games sales is not gamers trading or selling their games amongst each other, as this is relatively low scale and is less likely to impact developers the way used sales by gameshops are currently damaging developers. Quantic Dream's Heavy Rain lost between 5 and 10 million euro's to used sales (ref: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-12-used-market-cost-heavy-rain-1m-sales). Seriously, think about it. That's a huge loss and in the end it will only bite us gamers in the butt as the smaller devs won't be able to overcome these losses.

When it comes to old games I can imagine making an exception, since those are almost impossible to come by. But seriously; buying a game used when the new alternative is still in store but only 5 or 10 bucks cheaper? I'd rather know those 5 bucks go to the developer, instead of 30 of them being wasted on a store.

The thing is that, while they're making a large profit per unit, they still have a surplus of used games which wont be bought until they're in the bargain bin (and still many will be left over).

If they weren't making a reasonable profit on used games, it just wouldn't be worth the shelf space or the initial investment in buying the game from the customer.

Im surprised though that they're only adding that much mark-up though; the game stores near me will offer either $5-$10 or $20 off the purchase of a new title, then they'll mark it up to $30-$40. I prefer to keep my old games personally.

 

[spartan231490]

Kids nowadays don't like to keep their games and build a collection, they game, sell and trade games on a regular basis. Shops like gamestop are taking advantage of this circular cycle to rip off the costumer. Charging 50$ multiple times on a single copy.

Is it really worth buying a used copy of la noire, deus ex or resistance 3 for 53$? Remember that not a single penny goes to the developers and you're only making gamestop richer.

You guys have several options that are better, imo, like Amazon or other on-line shops. For example European consumers can go to Amazon.co.uk a buy deus ex for 15,99 pounds, that's 25 dollars!
The limited edition of dark souls costs 43?, any physical shop near me wont sell it for less than 60/70?(new or used).

And I'm sure that, regardless of what country you live in, you can find better and more economic solutions on-line.

I think that used games can be a good thing, for example I just bought msg2 and msg3 for 15?, but when it comes to recent ip's I think you should search for options that not only benefit your wallet but also contribute to the industry.

but if you prefer to spend 50 dollars on a used game, that's up to you.
whatever floats your boat...

As gamestop allows me to buy games easily and also allows me to buy games for cheap, I have every reason to buy used games for $53 You also forget the most important factor of gamestop. You pay for the convenience of being able to buy a game and go home and play it. Not spending a large sum of money just to wait for a week before you can play your game. Also, used games at gamestop are usually comparable in price to online. The only real exception is very recent games, at least in my experience.

 

[Tyrant T100]

"Is it really worth buying a used copy of la noire"

Yes I bought it just yesterday, it's still £40 in every store and I got a second hand copy for £22 that was in perfect condition with the dlc content still unactivated.

 

[DPeteD]

I quess you wouldnt like the fact I pirate a good few games. (= (i kid i kid)

 

[zombieshark6666]

No, selling / buying them from retailers is stupid, an important distinction people seem to forget.

How do I thumb this up?

 

[Ipsen]

When you buy games new, do note that, depending on when you buy the game, you support the developer (and publisher), or just the publisher. When games sell well at launch, (think 1-2 weeks after the launch date) it looks good for the developer, and gives them a much better chance of becoming employed for another project. After that point, the publisher doesn't care so much; should you decide to buy that game for $40-60 new, you only line the publisher's pocket, because they've already decided whether they'd can the developers or not.

I don't like this mishegoss about 'supporting the industry', especially when its developers continuously tie themselves to money-minded publishers. I recommend, if you like a game or its developers, express interest as early as possible. Pre-Order if you can, or buy within 1-2 weeks. Otherwise, save yourself money (and risk of a bad game) and get it used.

No time for sources, so take this as food for thought.

 

[getoffmycloud]

Without used games when I was in school I would have been lucky if I got one game a year for my birthday or Christmas so without being able to trade in games and buy new ones I would have missed out on a lot of awesome games. Now I have a job I buy a game new if it is available but there is nothing wrong with used games

 

[Raesvelg]

Not to weigh in on either side of this debate, but I do want to point out one thing that keeps bugging me: The "used car" analogy is bloody ridiculous.

A car wears out. It has a useful lifespan which is expended over the course of ownership, whether by one person or by multiple people. It cannot be traded around indefinitely after each person gets what they want out of it.

More importantly, a car has parts that wear out, and those parts are typically provided by the manufacturer, which makes them money. An old car requires quite a few parts over its lifetime, and that $1000 alternator, well, GM makes their share on that.

Used cars are not equivalent to used games. Used games do, in fact, occupy a nearly unique position in the market. Films have theater screenings, music has concert performances, and while books are similar to games in terms of longevity and tradeability, they don't cost $60 million to produce, and tend to sell for about 1/2 (in hardback) to 1/7th (in paperback) the cost of a game.

 

[Sonicron]

Wow, one example, that's real conclusive.

-Used games are often cheaper than the alternative,
-Used games benefit the used retailer, so it's not piracy (because I like the used retailer),
-It's easier to find old games in trade-in stores.

This one is especially relevant to me as a shop nearby has games going all the way back to the NES, but including SNES, Gameboy (original!), MegaDrive, Dreamcast, and a rather large collection of some classic and much sought after PS1 titles.

So yeah, I'll support them. I have no qualms about money not going to the developer if I buy Used from them.

Same here. The store near my home is run by friends of the family, and I'd rather support them than the big developers or retail chains any day of the week. They sell new games, too, but many folks go there for the used stuff; it's always in excellent condition, the prices are fair (in both selling and buying), and the store owners actually play the games themselves and are thus able to provide detailed information on the pros and cons of many popular titles.
In short, I love this kind of store, and it'd be a damn shame to see them go under because of some retarded hardware/software scheme that specifically torpedoes the used games market.

 

[Bluesclues]

snip

Now you're just trolling. Just count your losses and move on.

different snip

Your arguments are so flawed that those chinks in your armor you mentioned are becoming large gaping holes. In fact, I honestly believe that you're also trolling anyone who actually delivers you a proper argument that you can't seem to rebutt.

OT: If someone buys a game, returns it, and someone else buys that same game having become used, it's perfectly legal. Same as any other used market, no matter how "different" you seem to think they are. You claim that they're different because with cars, for example, you're still paying for parts and repair services. Well how about this: do consumers not do the same with DLC that has to be bought? Even if someone buys a game used, if they wanted access to the extra content, they'd still have to pay for it.

And to throw another fly in your oinment, using the same car argument: what about people who go to a junkyard and buy parts there? Or have repairs done at a repair shop not affiliated with the actual car company? Are they breaking the law by doing that? Are car companies throwing a hissy fit because of this? Didn't think so.

One of the many facts that you seem to not be able to understand is that some (actually, a lot of) gamers can't afford paying full price for every game or console that they'd like, due to extraneous situations, like being jobless for example, or dealing with school, loan, and other bill payments. There's also the younger gamers who have to rely on allowances (if they're lucky) as income for their expenses.

You're not better than those people just because you have the resources to waste on every new game you desire, nor does that give you the right to accuse someone who chooses to take advantage of a market that appeals to them a less dedicated gamer. Show some respect.

 

[DaWaffledude]

You guys have several options that are better, imo, like Amazon or other on-line shops. For example European consumers can go to Amazon.co.uk a buy deus ex for 15,99 pounds, that's 25 dollars!

Actually, only Britain uses the pound system. Most us us Europeans use the Euro.

<-- Nitpicker of the highest calibre.

 

[Racecarlock]

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.284933-WHY-are-used-video-games-bad
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.298911-Sonys-Going-to-Make-You-Repurchase-Used-Games
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.306704-Used-Games-v-Piracy
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.306770-Poll-For-those-that-buy-or-have-bought-used-games-This-is-not-another-Used-games-are-evil-thread
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.318028-Gamestop-giving-used-Arkham-City-buyers-Catwoman-code
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.125539-Realtime-CEO-Blames-Used-Games-for-Flat-Crackdown-Sales
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.284926-Fable-3-Dev-Used-Games-Sales-are-More-Problematic-Than-Piracy


Pick one. My work here is done.

 

[Bluesclues]

Not to weigh in on either side of this debate, but I do want to point out one thing that keeps bugging me: The "used car" analogy is bloody ridiculous.

A car wears out. It has a useful lifespan which is expended over the course of ownership, whether by one person or by multiple people. It cannot be traded around indefinitely after each person gets what they want out of it.

More importantly, a car has parts that wear out, and those parts are typically provided by the manufacturer, which makes them money. An old car requires quite a few parts over its lifetime, and that $1000 alternator, well, GM makes their share on that.

Used cars are not equivalent to used games. Used games do, in fact, occupy a nearly unique position in the market. Films have theater screenings, music has concert performances, and while books are similar to games in terms of longevity and tradeability, they don't cost $60 million to produce, and tend to sell for about 1/2 (in hardback) to 1/7th (in paperback) the cost of a game.

Car parts don't always have to be provided by the manufacturer though. Obiviously this wouldn't work with every part in the car, but with a used car you could do some shopping around at say, a junkyard, to see if they have a car that may have the part you need, in working condition. Voila, part aquired and paid for, but not from the manufacturer.

Also, car collectors have proven that even old cars can be maintained, or updated, while still being consistent in their primary function. So their lifespan can be very long as well, in the right hands. Conversely, game discs can break or game data can become corrupted, in the wrong hands, meaning that games aren't exactly everlasting either.

Not all films have theatre screenings (like those that are direct to DVD), not all musical performers hold concerts (though this is the least likely).

Not trying to say you're wrong or anything, I agree that the used markets aren't the same, but by the same token, they aren't entirely different either.

 

[DirgeNovak]

I kind of agree with the OP. Kind of. The "it's cheaper" argument doesn't really sit well with me. I don't know about you guys, but the used games stores I go to sell used games only 5$ less than new games. Would five more dollars really make a huge hole in your budget? If so, maybe you should think about taking up a less expensive hobby.

However, for older, discontinued games, used is pretty much the only way to go. If the publisher doesn't sell the game to retailers anymore, we still have an alternative to play it.

 

[Iwata]

I kind of agree with the OP. Kind of. The "it's cheaper" argument doesn't really sit well with me. I don't know about you guys, but the used games stores I go to sell used games only 5$ less than new games. Would five more dollars really make a huge hole in your budget? If so, maybe you should think about taking up a less expensive hobby.

That's the thing: the used stores I go to (and worked at) usually have games for half, a third, or a quarter of the original price. We're talking about saving as much as 75% on buying used as compared to new.

And if the industry provides the means, thankfully, to avoid turning this into a solely rich people hobby, why should we, as consumers, deny that, ignored a cheaper game and keep buying expensive new games exclusively? By buying used, I buy way, way, waaaaaaaaaaay more games than I would if I just bought new. Surely that's not a bad thing by any measure.

Sorry, but the "if it's too expensive, go do something else" argument reeks of something foul.

 

[OpiateChicken]

I don't always buy used games, but when I do, I buy...

...The Most Interesting Man in the World: The Game of Dos Equis?