penny arcade equates used games to piracy

[rembrandtqeinstein]

check it out here http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/8/25/

The basic argument is if you pirate the publisher doesn't see a dime, if you buy used the publisher doesn't see a dime.

I would go one step further and say used games are WORSE than piracy. Because with used games you are extracting money from the games market. A used game buyer has money in their pocket, and has shown a willingness to spend it on a game. A pirate doesn't necessarily have money or if they do is not willing to spend it.

In my opinion used game shops (and to a lesser extent rental places) are parasites leeching off of the creativity and risktaking of developers and publishers. You could claim that because someone knows they can resell a game they are more willing to pay the new price but I would argue that the amount is negligible compared to the amount a publisher doesn't get when someone purchases used instead of new.

Of course digital downloads and online purchases are going to murder games retailers just like they did record and book stores so I think the gamestop problem will go away in a few years.

 

[Sev72]

If you buy a used game the original owner must have purchased the game to begin with, so they did see a dime. It also means that that former owner cannot continue to use that product while with piracy they can, which is the key difference.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Developers already get the money out of the people who originally bought the game, so it's not too much like pirating... unless pirates buy a game first and then hand it to two other people, the one selling the game and the other buying it from the store yet again.
Of course, the way companies look at that is "that's two lost sales" to which I would reply, if I might be so bold, that maybe if the prices of the new product weren't so high those two people would've already had the game straight from you, with the money going straight to you.

You can sell games at a lower price individually and make a greater overall profit if more people buy it, you can also end up with that being a good investment in the sense that people appreciate the low prices and the high quality of a game you've made and will buy more products from you based on that experience.

 

[Furious Styles]

Selling a CD you bought isn't illegal and no one objects to it, but making copies and selling them is, rightly, illegal. The same should applies to DVDs, books and should apply to games, reselling a single game is perfectly fine both morally and legally and is completely not relatable to piracy. Making multiple copies of said game and selling them, however, is wrong and is piracy.

It's the same principle with cars, reselling a car is fine but making a replica of said car and selling that is illegal in so many ways.

Games developers need to stop bitching.

edit: and in any case, its the old "see a band live" argument. someone who may not previously have bought a game due the price tag will now buy a game, love it and buy the next one brand new. Like me, I wouldn't have bought mass effect from amazon because it cost too much for me at the time, so I bought it second hand and loved it. I then pre-ordered mass effect 2 as soon as I could, i may not have if second hands games were illegal.

 

[Tabascofish]

When you buy a game used, the developer doesn't see a dime from YOUR purchase. Sure, they get money from the first person who bought it, but if people didn't buy it used, then devs would see even more money from those purchases. This isn't rocket science. It's pretty simple addition, people.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

When you buy a game used, the developer doesn't see a dime from YOUR purchase. Sure, they get money from the first person who bought it, but if people didn't buy it used, then devs would see even more money from those purchases. This isn't rocket science. It's pretty simple addition, people.

We are aware what drives them, what we disagree on is the reasoning and ethincs behind it.
If you buy a used car from a friend, would that be stealing from the car company?

 

[Jack and Calumon]

No... I don't think they equated it to Piracy. They saw their point and, as Kevin said, it's like a parallel economy. What is happening is certainly something that DOES need to be sorted out. GameStop is making too much money from this business, and something, In my opinion, needs to be done.

Calumon: ...Are we really arguing over a webcomic?

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

They aren't arguing about Used Games so much as they are about Game Stops trading policies a.k.a. Give Premium Store Credit for Games shortly after release, then sell the used product back to consumers at nearly full price but with enough off that it looks like a deal, so that not a dime leaves the store. It's a pretty sleazy business practice, I think they're a lot less venemous towards places like Pawn Shops and the like, or even the second hand "collectors" market. Similarly I don't think that even publishers are worried about "used" game sales several years after a titles release.

It's basically the "new release skimming" that they aren't fond of.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Piracy is when one purchased game (if even that) is distributed between several different people.

Used games is when one purchased game is distributed to one other person.

How is used games worse than Pirating?

Frankly, this whole ordeal is stupid. Second hand market have existed ever since... well, since any kind of market existed. It's been around ever since gaming started. It's a logical way to dispose of a product you no longer want that has been universally accepted. There's nothing wrong with it. When you've bought something, that thing is yours. You don't own the idea, you don't own the right to clone or copy that thing, but you own that one object. You are free to sell it on or even give it away if you want to.

This is why I hate anti-used games arguments. It's basically saying "ONLY THE BIG BOYS ARE ALLOWED TO SELL STUFF". If you agree that selling used games is wrong, then you are saying that it's wrong for anyone to sell anything they own.

Need to get money by having a flee market? Nope, sorry, that's morally wrong. Have you grown out of your jeans and feel like selling them to a Second hand store? Sorry, that's morally wrong. Corporations being just as, if note more greedy than the people selling their stuff? THEY ARE UNDERDOGS WE NEED TO RESPECT!

 

[Tabascofish]

We are aware what drives them, what we disagree on is the reasoning and ethics behind it.
If you buy a used car from a friend, would that be stealing from the car company?

Yeah I understand that, I was referring to the two posters above me who used the "well someone else bought it already, so devs already got money from it" argument.

I don't consider buying used games or cars stealing per se, but it does prevent money from a new purchase from getting to the manufacturer. Gamestop marks up trade-ins by 200%. That's an insane amount of profit, none of which is going back to the developers. Would you mark up a used car by 200%? I don't think anyone in their right mind would buy it if you did.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

And if we're going to follow that logic then I suppose thrift stores and pawn shops are theft too eh?

 

[Rath709]

So people who buy second hand cars are in fact car pirates?

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

If you buy a used game the original owner must have purchased the game to begin with, so they did see a dime. It also means that that former owner cannot continue to use that product while with piracy they can, which is the key difference.

No they only saw the money ONCE for TWO sales of the game, cutting the profit they WOULD have made in half. Thats like one person buying and one person pirating. Half possible profit.

I still stand by the fact that pircay is ok if its a game you would never ever ever buy ever. I pirated a rom of pokemon mystery dungion. I wouldnt buy that game even at gunpoint. I would pay a penny for it ever. No potential sale is lost, i was never a customer. If the option of piracy wasnt there i wouldnt buy the game to make up for it.
That way you dont take away a potential sale.

In this case the guy has money, and wants the game but buys it second hand and so gets a game sale for NO money to the publisher when he could have got it new. Piracy is much much better if you stand by my rule of "If you want it buy it, if its a passing interest or for a cousin (my case) pirate it, you were never going to buy it anyway"

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Piracy is when one purchased game (if even that) is distributed between several different people.

Used games is when one purchased game is distributed to one other person.

How is used games worse than Pirating?

Frankly, this whole ordeal is stupid. Second hand market have existed ever since... well, since any kind of market existed. It's been around ever since gaming started. It's a logical way to dispose of a product you no longer want that has been universally accepted. There's nothing wrong with it. When you've bought something, that thing is yours. You don't own the idea, you don't own the right to clone or copy that thing, but you own that one object. You are free to sell it on or even give it away if you want to.

This is why I hate anti-used games arguments. It's basically saying "ONLY THE BIG BOYS ARE ALLOWED TO SELL STUFF". If you agree that selling used games is wrong, then you are saying that it's wrong for anyone to sell anything they own.

Need to get money by having a flee market? Nope, sorry, that's morally wrong. Have you grown out of your jeans and feel like selling them to a Second hand store? Sorry, that's morally wrong. Corporations being just as, if note more greedy than the people selling their stuff? THEY ARE UNDERDOGS WE NEED TO RESPECT!

this. its the same with any used market anywhere since the beginning of time.

you dont hear any of those businesses whining like a bunch of sissy girls about it.

piracy is much worse, there is a difference, your making copies for free and giving them out to whoever WHILE keeping your own copy. used is a TRADE

TRADE =/= STEALING

 

[Azure-Supernova]

If games weren't so expensive in the first place, there wouldn't be a market for used games. Besides, it's hardly a bad thing. Though I usually buy my PS3 and PC games new, my Wii, PS2 and Gamecube get pre-owned titles. And the only reason I buy PS3 and PC games new is more to do with the condition of discs rather than to give the developers their share.

I don't think it's wrong, a developer doesn't see anything from the resale of a game, but they saw something from the initial sale and that's the point. The person who bought it brand new plays it until fulfilled and then wants money or credit to buy another new game. Would you say that he then has to let that game gather dust on his shelf or throw it away? Or should he trade it in for the retailer to put back on sale as full price again?

 

[Mister Six]

When you buy a game used, the developer doesn't see a dime from YOUR purchase. Sure, they get money from the first person who bought it, but if people didn't buy it used, then devs would see even more money from those purchases. This isn't rocket science. It's pretty simple addition, people.

Yes and no, sure some of those sales would occur if there wasn't a used game market, but it is hard to judge just how many sales. Would you say 90%,50%, or just 10% of the people who bought it used would buy it new? Some people buy used because they are unwilling to purchase a new game at a $60 price tag, whether it is an unwillingness to pay such a significant sum or a general lack of disposable income. Neither of those would likely purchase all that many new games in the initial sale period, and based on the retailers I've had the displeasure of dealing with, would not buy the game for at least a couple of years.

As for rental stores I would have to disagree with linking them to Used game sales and piracy as they are a great way for gamers to get a real experience with a game before purchasing it, which makes up for the general lack of consistency in reviews. I, for example, have a game pass with Blockbuster so I can go out and try the newest games, though their selection continues to degrade, and consequently be far better informed for my purchases. Plus I cannot stand paying $60 for a five-hour game that receives little to no support from the developer after release.

In my opinion the best way to deal with the used game market isn't with the current mindset, such as EA's Online sports pass, or how Mass Effect 2 came with the Cerberus network, but by having the stores that sell used games return a percentage of the sale to the publisher/developer of the game. Granted it would need some ironing out with regards to how much is paid, in what installments, and who exactly effects, but as it stand places like gamestop buys games for $5-$10 and sell them for $40-$50, money which is effectively taken out of the gaming market.

 

[The Procrastinated End]

Seeing as how the original buyer now owns the game the publisher has no right over the item, any argument against used game sales is invalid.

 

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

I had a post on this somewhere... I'll go find it now.

If you really think buying preowned is a loss for the publishers then you are just buying into their hype. You don't see the same whiny crap about with music, movies, or books do you?

They made their money when the game was sold, trying to make money each and every time someone so much as looks at the copy from that point on is despicable.

When do music companies ever stop whining?

Movies are a bit more sophisticated about it but they cover it up with cinema sales and the fact that pre-owned DVDs aren't as big as pre-owned games.

Pre-owned books? ... libraries? ... anyway I get almost all my books for free, I'm given lots buy a guy who writes reviews for some book magazine. But I occasionally splash out on a book I really like the look of then and there.

Also with the increasing costs of developing games I think it's reasonable they want money for people selling their games.

How many hands could a pre-owned game pass through? 20 people? ... more?

They're not demanding that every time someone picks up a copy of a game they should get money which I respect. On a £40 they will never get, they only ask for £10 of that, and it's completely optional. You don't have to buy into this if you don't want to.

But if a game developer comes out with a really amazing game that they worked really hard on then I think they deserve to get the money for that game. I still buy pre-owned for old games but new releases that I'm very excited about I will pay for first hand.

THQ are currently making amazing Warhammer 40,000 titles... now to me this means they deserve my money so I will support them.

Still whatever... it's 2.30 in the morning and I want to get to sleep.

There was some more after that but it's greatly disjointed as it was a direct response... if you're really that interested just click on my name in the comment and read through that thread.

 

[MisterShine]

Your title is a bit misleading..

If I am purchasing games in order to reward their creators, and to ensure that more of these ingenious contraptions are produced, I honestly can't figure out how buying a used game was any better than piracy. From the the perspective of a developer, they are almost certainly synonymous.

So, in the view of "how is this helping the makers of my entertainment", used game sales are similar to piracy, but not equal. Your title makes it sound like Penny Arcade is calling used game buyers pirates, which they aren't.

Though I do support developers/publishers rewarding people for buying new games, digital media faces hurdles that no other product or service has ever faced before it (namely, that things never really get lost or wear down), and they need to come up with ways to deal with that, or face some massive shut downs. Also I will say this, I'd rather see the entire gamestop network crash and burn before even a single developer studio shuts down. Though the devs really have to meet us half way on this crap, if they don't have to deal with used sale bringing down their profits, they must be willing to lower the price point, otherwise sales will still plummet.

 

[danintexas]

I will buy games full price when the makers stop treating me like a criminal for buying it. Why do I need to have an internet connection to play an offline game. Why do I need to sign up an online account for some stupid ass game I will only ever play offline. Why do you feel the need to install copy protection software on my machine - hijacking my computer and adding increased overhead to make sure the game I installed from a CD isn't hacked.

Stop fucking punishing the people who pay for your games and I will start buying more new off the shelf games.

My morals prevent me from downloading the hacked copies from bit torrent with all the copy protection removed. But at the end of the day - you treat me a paying customer as a criminal you can shut the fuck up and deal with what I buy and where. You start making games where it punishes the people who don't torrent - fuck it - I have hundreds of games already. I have no problem just cycling the hundreds I have now and not buying any new ones. There are pleanty of indie devs who just want someone to play their work of art and realize it isn't a good thing to punish their customers.

Dear - EA - Activision - Sony - Microsoft - UBISoft - FUCK YOU

*signed a paying customer who buys alot less because of these nazi tactics you use against me*


Yes its a hot button topic for me. ;-)