controversy over used games

[AcacianLeaves]

I also don't waste money at the theater. Last movie I saw at the theater was "Indiana Jones and the Aliens that didn't fit in an Indiana Jones movie". I would never go and pay that "3D Premium" either. It is not a good value and that's just for the ticket price, add in the way overpriced refreshments and it becomes a horrible value.

I keep hearing how SNES games were $60 and $70. Ya know, I was an adult during the SNES era (so I know what I paid for games) and I never paid more than $50 for a SNES game. I dunno, maybe it's because I shopped at Wal Mart/K-Mart/Target but I never saw the prices that high.

Even if they were, the cost of the plastic cartridge, circuit board, chips, battery (for saving) cost more than pressing a DVD. SNES games also gave you paper maps too which is something we don't see in console games much anymore.

The most expensive an SNES game ever got was $60, and those were with the special edition cloth map/figurine things. $50 was the standard price, and with inflation a general price increase of $50 from 1994 to 2010 actually means games are much cheaper today than they were during that time. Technically if they were keeping up with inflation games should cost us $75 today.

Yeah, games are cheaper to manufacture today but that has nothing to do with how much it costs to make the game. It cost between $50k and at most $400k to make a game on the SNES. On current generation systems, the costs are usually over $100 million.

Then they need to cut back, people are not willing to pay much more than $60 for games. It's up to the gaming industry to respond to changes needed to keep themselves employed.

Some developers do cut back and create budget XBLA titles. Episodic gaming is another example of this. But consumers aren't going to be okay if the entire industry decided to 'cut back' and remove the graphical upgrades, dozens to hundreds of hours of content, and polished games that we've gotten used to.

There's a whole section of the industry for people like you, just don't expect to buy AAA titles for less than $60. That's not an unreasonable price.

 

[JPH330]

-snippity-

Not everyone, the publisher isn't happy because they don't see any of that money.
First off it's nothing like a used car, the main costs for cars are manufacturing costs which are covered by the selling price. Game development can cost millions of dollars though, 1 game sale doesn't come close to paying for that.
The basic problem is that when someone buys a used game, that person is a paying customer who could have bought a new copy, thus letting the makers of the game receive money for what they made, but instead because they're buying a used game they're still paying for it but the creators aren't getting anything. The customer might as well be pirating the game.

The Video Game business is ran by a bunch of retarded monkeys then if they're not trying to cover the cost in initial sales.

Think about what you posted. How can a game company make money with me sitting and always keeping a copy of ... I dunno... Suikoden II which I've had for years.

Now let's say if God of War III launched and it only sold 80k copies it's first month and then roughly 60k moved used 2 months from then. Yes that would be a problem.

Um... I don't think you realize just how expensive it is to make a top-notch video game these days.

Um that's not the consumers concern. Do you ask how much it costed to make your car, toaster, couch, etc...?

Funny how people seem to treat the game industry as some pet they must protect.

If the publishers don't get enough money to continue making games, then we don't get games anymore.

You want games to continue being made, correct? Then I think you should be a bit more considerate toward the publishers.

LOL, please. The game industry is bringing in too much money to stop making games. They will make games as long as they can make money off of it.

If they have to spend $20 Million to make a game instead of $100 Million to keep making money then they will do that.

My support is not required and to be honest, it's kinda scary how people who make no money from the industry are so concerned about EA's (just an example) bottom line. Do you throw the same support to other industries to ensure they keep pumping out products or do you just assume that they can manage without your help?

If they have to cut the budget costs by such a large degree, that will mean that the content is going to have its corners majorly cut. That's something I'd rather not have happen. And it just seems hypocritical to play and enjoy a game, but turn around and say that the people who made that game don't deserve any of your money.

And by the way, I don't necessarily agree with all the extreme stuff that the publishers have been saying, I'm just pointing out the flaws in your argument. I like playing devil's advocate.

Well Devil's Advocate,

The pubs do get my money when I buy new. When I buy used then they get someone else's money but one way or the other, that copy of the game was bought...new.

Okay, you seem to be completely missing the point but I stopped caring awhile ago, so go continue preaching about how wrong publishers are for wanting compensation for providing entertainment.

 

[sharkinz]

The thing I don't like about used games is that the developer (the people who get spend 80 hours a week making the game) do not get any of the money well a used game is sold. Support developers and buy games new.

 

[Gindil]

If the publishers don't get enough money to continue making games, then we don't get games anymore.

You want games to continue being made, correct? Then I think you should be a bit more considerate toward the publishers.

...

This argument is full of holes. You have Kongregate and Newgrounds that have free games. You also have indie developers and modders that make up another faction of gaming. Just because people forget about one section of gaming, doesn't mean the industry will suffer. More than likely, money can be made elsewhere in gaming such as Unreal does with their engine and upkeep.

 

[sharkinz]

The thing I don't like about used games is that the developer (the people who get spend 80 hours a week making the game) do not get any of the money well a used game is sold. Support developers and buy games new.

Why should they? They got paid when the game was bought new. What other industry gets royalties on used products?

They (the developer) should get money off a used sale is because they spend millions upon millions upon millions of dollars to make the game. Adding to that right now developers are laying people off by the truck load and publishers will not support developers unless the developer makes a mainstream game. Buying games new allows for better tracking of sales numbers, which helps game developers who want to make new/more innovative games. In my opinion buying a used game is kinda like downloading illegally (from the perspective of the publisher and developer) the people who make the game and spend tons of time designing it, as well as the people who produce the game, do not see any return from used sales.

Thats just my own opinion though. I understand that a lot of people buy used games because its so much cheaper then buying new and they need to save money. If you want to buy games used that is perfectly fine, to each his own.

 

[Pimptimus_Prime]

I am going to copy/paste something I put in to another thread like this, because peopel are making incredibly uninformed arguments over the issue, and because it would take a long time for me to type out essentially the same thing.

How many people here are actually under the assumption that a game company isn't payed for it's work until a game is purchased off the shelf? That all these stores are being kind enough to hold their games on commission? The game publisher has been payed for every copy of every game you have ever seen on a shelf. Game Developers are usually payed a lump sum by the publishing company before the game is even done being transfered on to disks. It's just that simple.

Does anyone here think Valve started Steam because it was more convenient for the end consumer, or even as a means for DRM? It was started so that they receive all of the profit from games it sells through the system. It comes down not to turning a profit, but to turning MORE of a profit.

Say I have a development house, Ghettobot Games. We make a new FPS called Bad Ass Game (BAG). We shop around for publishers to release our game: That means we look for the company willing to give us the most for our game, then it becomes their burden to print the game on to disks, distribute it to national retailers, foot the bill for advertising, and ship the copies to retail outlets. Usually in these deals there is some sort of bonus for the developer if the game sells over a certain amount, and that amount is also usually the amount of copies that need to be sold before the Publisher will print to disk new copies of the game.

So let's say EA picks up BAG, they pay Ghettobot Games $10 million, and we are pretty much done with the process. For all intents and purposes, EA owns BAG. EA then contacts the retail outlets that sell the game worldwide, Walmart, Best Buy, Gamestop, Toy 'R' Us, etc., etc., and negotiate the amount of copies of BAG they are willing to purchase.

Let me repeat this for effect: All of the retail outlets BUY copies of the game.

So let's say our negotiators do a bang up job and EA gets an average of $20 a copy (an unrealistic, highballed number but it's my fake game, and it's just that damned good.). Now let's say EA distribute $5 million copies world wide, meaning EA just made $100 million, before factoring in TV commercials, Magazine articles, Payola Reviews in Magazines and Websites, and the shipping costs to get the game out to the Distribution Centers of the companies they just sold copies to.

I am again going to repeat myself for emphasis here: EA just SOLD 5 million PHYSICAL copies of the game to retailers.

From this point on, the Developer and Publisher have been payed their fair due for ALL copies of the game "In the Wild". The problem at this point is companies that are willing to buy used copies are going to order less new copies of the games if they feel they will have a decent turn around on copies, lowering the profit margin the Publisher receives.

The problem isn't that we buy or sell our USED games, it's that less NEW games are ordered by a select few companies, primarily Gamestop. Unfortunately, Gamestop has become big enough that when they decide to order less NEW games, that can be a decent chunk of change. Nothing worrying just yet, but Walmart and Best Buy both tried to implement a Used Game trade in System over the course of the last year. Both failed, but the video game companies noticed, and have been scrambling for a way to protect themselves. They are acting out of fear and aren't thinking about how the people who buy games will react.

I have been playing games a long time, and remember when online multiplayer didn't exist. I also remember when it was introduced and single player NEVER suffered for it. It was a gift or an afterthought. On occasion it was added a pay content, and if you liked the game enough it was worth it. Now it seems that if a game has no multiplayer it is panned as incomplete but if a game's single player suffers because multiplayer was added and drained funding from the main game. I personally would like to see more games that are released as single player and/or local co-op/multiplayer, and you can purchase multiplayer as DLC. Then if a company wants to give out free codes to enable multiplayer, it's value added, not robbing people of things they think they are entitled to.

It's also what game companies are talking about doing to make more money off of used copies of games. Not making up for losses for used games: MAKING MORE MONEY OFF OF USED GAMES... You know, what with them having received full compensation for all copies of the game already.

 

[sharkinz]

The thing I don't like about used games is that the developer (the people who get spend 80 hours a week making the game) do not get any of the money well a used game is sold. Support developers and buy games new.

Why should they? They got paid when the game was bought new. What other industry gets royalties on used products?

They (the developer) should get money off a used sale is because they spend millions upon millions upon millions of dollars to make the game. Adding to that right now developers are laying people off by the truck load and publishers will not support developers unless the developer makes a mainstream game. Buying games new allows for better tracking of sales numbers, which helps game developers who want to make new/more innovative games. In my opinion buying a used game is kinda like downloading illegally (from the perspective of the publisher and developer) the people who make the game and spend tons of time designing it, as well as the people who produce the game, do not see any return from used sales.

Thats just my own opinion though. I understand that a lot of people buy used games because its so much cheaper then buying new and they need to save money. If you want to buy games used that is perfectly fine, to each his own.

Ok, so the game industry should get special royalties (no other industry gets them) on used merchandise because:

- They spend millions making their product
- Developers are getting laid off

What can I say? LMFAO.

Look, they get paid one time for each copy they sell. That's good enough for every other industry (including Hollywood studios and DVD/Blu-Rays) and that's good enough for the game industry.

No I am not saying that developers and publishers should get money off of used games sales. I am saying it is better for the industry if people buy games new.

 

[Gindil]

No I am not saying that developers and publishers should get money off of used games sales. I am saying it is better for the industry if people buy games new.

Better for the industry does not equate to better for consumers. That's the struggle of a (semi) free market such as the gaming industry.

 

[sharkinz]

No I am not saying that developers and publishers should get money off of used games sales. I am saying it is better for the industry if people buy games new.

Better for the industry does not equate to better for consumers. That's the struggle of a (semi) free market such as the gaming industry.

In the short term I agree that it is beneficial for consumers to buy games used. In the long run though if people were to buy games new then developers would make more money and would be willing to try new/different/innovative projects and IPs, instead of the sequel parade we are seeing right now. But I do think that it is better for peoples wallets if they buy used.

 

[sharkinz]

The thing I don't like about used games is that the developer (the people who get spend 80 hours a week making the game) do not get any of the money well a used game is sold. Support developers and buy games new.

Why should they? They got paid when the game was bought new. What other industry gets royalties on used products?

They (the developer) should get money off a used sale is because they spend millions upon millions upon millions of dollars to make the game. Adding to that right now developers are laying people off by the truck load and publishers will not support developers unless the developer makes a mainstream game. Buying games new allows for better tracking of sales numbers, which helps game developers who want to make new/more innovative games. In my opinion buying a used game is kinda like downloading illegally (from the perspective of the publisher and developer) the people who make the game and spend tons of time designing it, as well as the people who produce the game, do not see any return from used sales.

Thats just my own opinion though. I understand that a lot of people buy used games because its so much cheaper then buying new and they need to save money. If you want to buy games used that is perfectly fine, to each his own.

Ok, so the game industry should get special royalties (no other industry gets them) on used merchandise because:

- They spend millions making their product
- Developers are getting laid off

What can I say? LMFAO.

Look, they get paid one time for each copy they sell. That's good enough for every other industry (including Hollywood studios and DVD/Blu-Rays) and that's good enough for the game industry.

No I am not saying that developers and publishers should get money off of used games sales. I am saying it is better for the industry if people buy games new.

I think the game industry is far from bankruptcy. The used industry is necessary. Gaming can be expensive and so many are locked out. Used games and consoles brings in a few more people and that also helps the game industry.

People who buy used may also buy DLC or the sequel if they like the game. There's a new customer that they would not have with the used industry.

I agree with your argument if favor of used game sales and how it can attract new gamers. However, the games industry is suffering. Hardware and software sales are down from last year and the year before last. Studios are closing and people are buying less. Again though your argument if favor of used game sales is something I had not thought of before and I actually can see your point.

 

[RowdyRodimus]

-snippity-

Not everyone, the publisher isn't happy because they don't see any of that money.
First off it's nothing like a used car, the main costs for cars are manufacturing costs which are covered by the selling price. Game development can cost millions of dollars though, 1 game sale doesn't come close to paying for that.
The basic problem is that when someone buys a used game, that person is a paying customer who could have bought a new copy, thus letting the makers of the game receive money for what they made, but instead because they're buying a used game they're still paying for it but the creators aren't getting anything. The customer might as well be pirating the game.

The Video Game business is ran by a bunch of retarded monkeys then if they're not trying to cover the cost in initial sales.

Think about what you posted. How can a game company make money with me sitting and always keeping a copy of ... I dunno... Suikoden II which I've had for years.

Now let's say if God of War III launched and it only sold 80k copies it's first month and then roughly 60k moved used 2 months from then. Yes that would be a problem.

Um... I don't think you realize just how expensive it is to make a top-notch video game these days.

Um that's not the consumers concern. Do you ask how much it costed to make your car, toaster, couch, etc...?

Funny how people seem to treat the game industry as some pet they must protect.

If the publishers don't get enough money to continue making games, then we don't get games anymore.

You want games to continue being made, correct? Then I think you should be a bit more considerate toward the publishers.

LOL, please. The game industry is bringing in too much money to stop making games. They will make games as long as they can make money off of it.

If they have to spend $20 Million to make a game instead of $100 Million to keep making money then they will do that.

My support is not required and to be honest, it's kinda scary how people who make no money from the industry are so concerned about EA's (just an example) bottom line. Do you throw the same support to other industries to ensure they keep pumping out products or do you just assume that they can manage without your help?

Have you ever seen the movie Mr. Mom with Michaeol Keaton? There's a subplot with his wife going to work in an ad agency and has to come up with a campaign for Schooner Tuna during a recession. She comes up with one where they lower the price during the recession to help out the customers but admit they will go back to regular prices when the recession is over. There sales go up like 300% after that.

Now, the reason I mention this is that the publishers don't care that we are in the worst economic times since the 30's and have done nothing to lower prices for the customers. They don't care a bit about us, in fact, they keep raising development costs for unnecessary reasons but instead of looking at things they fuck up on in financials, they blame used game sales or to be more to the point: The customers.

Maybe if they even acted like they care that people can't afford things the same way now they coulod five years ago I might have some sympathy for them, but as it stands I see 11% unemployment (actually more like 15-17% unofficially) and it really doesn't bother me if Kotick, Newell and the rest of the publishers don't get an extra $3 bucks because of a used game that sells.

They'd make a lot more money if they streamlined their operations and didn't do stupid shit like hire Hollywood actors for a 5 minute voice over or design a new graphics engine that simulates leaves blowing in the wind.