Poll: Buying Used Games is just as Bad as Pirating

[dryg]

I don't understand how so many people are saying that piracy is worse than second hand sales. Is no one looking at the potential of money handed to a dev? In second hand sales, a sale of a game is 100% confirmed. A person wanted it, and that person bought it. It shouldn't matter if it's legal or if that copy was bought once before, 2 people are playing 1 copy of the game. After that second sale is confirmed, that is a solid loss of money a dev could have made if the price was right. With piracy, there is no guarantee that the pirate would have bought the game if they couldn't pirate it, nor is there a guarantee that the pirate would not have bought the game after playing it. You can guarantee that the used game customer will not be paying the dev for their fun at a later time. Ultimately, 100% of used sales are a loss to the dev while piracy can fluctuate and the definition of a loss can change drastically depending on the circumstances.

Keep in mind I'm auguring strictly from a "which is worse" line of logic. I really don't believe that all players should pay for the games they play ever just because some one else made it. I just keep seeing all these weak arguments saying that Used: 1 sale = 20 plays, Piracy: 1 sale = 2,000,000 plays, lame car analogies, and the definition of what is worse is dictated by what is legal and what is not.

Bottom line: There has been at least one person on this forum at some point in time who has admitted to piracy and then proceeded to buy the game which gave the devs money. I'd like to see the post of the person who bought a used game and then felt they needed to buy a new copy so that the devs got money too. Piracy may be more rampant and uncontrolled, but there is no way to accurately asses the actual damage it does. The same can not be said for use game sales.

*An heroes myself*

I pirated the first S.T.A.L.K.E.R., bought it because it was fucking awsome and then bought every game in the series since. With Call of Pripyat I pirated the russian version because it would take months to get to europe and I had allready pre-pruchased it, am I evil and should burn in hell because they got 4 sales of one pirated copy of a game I would never had bought in the first place?
And thats just a few..

Edit: 4th game was on steam if you are wondering..

 

[LordZ]

This thread is so full of bullshit I couldn't keep reading it.

Unless the person who uploaded the initial copy of a game to a torrent site literally stole his copy just to crack it and upload it, there very fucking much was a first sale there. Copying a game isn't magic. You have to have access to it one way or another. Either the person who cracked it stole it physically or they bought it legally. In the first case, yes you would be correct but the only person who really stole anything was the initial theft.

Anyone who thinks stealing data is stealing better call the thought police because I'm stealing your thoughts right now. Copying is a basic function for learning. We've all been doing it since day one. Even if you were the first to think of something, you don't/can't own an idea. This entitlement bullshit has been brought on by the invention of copyright and patent systems is a cancer to the entire purpose of those same systems. The whole purpose of the copyright/patent systems was to reward innovation, creativity and invention. If the people who invented those systems saw the way they were being abused today they'd roll over in their graves.

The only benefit to buying used versus "piracy" is that one is legal and the other is not. /thread

Anyone trying to argue the economic benefit of buying used needs to pass me some of what they're smoking. Do you really think that money couldn't have been better spent?

Also, this argument is incomplete because it doesn't even address game rental services where the ratio of people playing per legally purchased copy of a game is actually comparable to a pirated game.

 

[lapan]

You have to see it that way: If you have the possibility to buy a game used, then you can even buy it after all copies are long since off the shelves. And if it doesn't get sold anymore the devs won't get any money either way. Fighting the used market also affects your ability to play the old games of your youth again if you feel like it.

 

[AvsJoe]

I hope that the thread title is incorrect. I haven't bought a "new" game in about 7 years now! I rely on used copies!

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Here is what I would like to see:

A game developer list all of his production expenses (marketing doesn't count). After listing the cost of production also list a number equal to the production cost + x% to account for risk. That is how much the developer needs to make in order to keep making games, otherwise he has to get another job.

Then show a running total of all the revenue they get from a game "idea". As in sales of the game itself, sales of merch, sales of the movie rights to Uwe Boll...etc. And of course the numbers need to be verifiable.

I would be much more likely to buy a game new knowing I was supporting a developer's, or studio's livelihood as opposed to Bobby Kotick's hooker and blow habits.

 

[LordZ]

I don't understand how so many people are saying that piracy is worse than second hand sales. Is no one looking at the potential of money handed to a dev? In second hand sales, a sale of a game is 100% confirmed. A person wanted it, and that person bought it. It shouldn't matter if it's legal or if that copy was bought once before, 2 people are playing 1 copy of the game. After that second sale is confirmed, that is a solid loss of money a dev could have made if the price was right. With piracy, there is no guarantee that the pirate would have bought the game if they couldn't pirate it, nor is there a guarantee that the pirate would not have bought the game after playing it. You can guarantee that the used game customer will not be paying the dev for their fun at a later time. Ultimately, 100% of used sales are a loss to the dev while piracy can fluctuate and the definition of a loss can change drastically depending on the circumstances.

Keep in mind I'm auguring strictly from a "which is worse" line of logic. I really don't believe that all players should pay for the games they play ever just because some one else made it. I just keep seeing all these weak arguments saying that Used: 1 sale = 20 plays, Piracy: 1 sale = 2,000,000 plays, lame car analogies, and the definition of what is worse is dictated by what is legal and what is not.

Bottom line: There has been at least one person on this forum at some point in time who has admitted to piracy and then proceeded to buy the game which gave the devs money. I'd like to see the post of the person who bought a used game and then felt they needed to buy a new copy so that the devs got money too. Piracy may be more rampant and uncontrolled, but there is no way to accurately asses the actual damage it does. The same can not be said for use game sales.

*An heroes myself*

I pirated the first S.T.A.L.K.E.R., bought it because it was fucking awsome and then bought every game in the series since. With Call of Pripyat I pirated the russian version because it would take months to get to europe and I had allready pre-pruchased it, am I a evil and should burn in hell because they got 4 sales of one pirated copy of a game I would never had bought in the first place?
And thats just a few..

After reading this post, I feel saddened that I missed it before making my own post. My points stand but he managed to make the same argument I was going for without getting into the sticky tangent of the legality of the entire copyright and patent systems. In other words, he made his point without the risk of derailing the thread.

 

[Apackof12Ninjas]

This thread is so full of bullshit I couldn't keep reading it.

Unless the person who uploaded the initial copy of a game to a torrent site literally stole his copy just to crack it and upload it, there very fucking much was a first sale there. Copying a game isn't magic. You have to have access to it one way or another. Either the person who cracked it stole it physically or they bought it legally. In the first case, yes you would be correct but the only person who really stole anything was the initial theft.

Anyone who thinks stealing data is stealing better call the thought police because I'm stealing your thoughts right now. Copying is a basic function for learning. We've all been doing it since day one. Even if you were the first to think of something, you don't/can't own an idea. This entitlement bullshit has been brought on by the invention of copyright and patent systems is a cancer to the entire purpose of those same systems. The whole purpose of the copyright/patent systems was to reward innovation, creativity and invention. If the people who invented those systems saw the way they were being abused today they'd roll over in their graves.

There is only benefit to buying used versus "piracy" is that one is legal and the other is not. /thread

Anyone trying to argue the economic benefit of buying used needs to pass me some of what they're smoking. Do you really think that money couldn't have been better spent?

Also, this argument is incomplete because it doesn't even address game rental services where the ratio of people playing per legally purchased copy of a game is actually comparable to a pirated game.

Well you might think you "cant own a idea" but the law of the US says you can. *shrug* You might not like the law but it still the law.

Also Rentals used to have a unique place in the gaming industry as there was virtually no game demos for games that came out and renting a game was the only way to see if it was "buy worthy" before you actually bought it.

They are on a bit of a decline since game demos are easily and widely available via online features but talk to any gaming industry rep, they consider game rentals to be a form of advertising to the point where they make deals with company's like Blockbuster and Movie Gallery to get pre-street day copies and promote people to play and hopefully eventually buy their game.

But your right about one thing, lots of bs in this thread. OP's idiotic idea that the second hand game market is just the same as stealing. /facepalm

Also buying used does not = piracy not even by a long shot. Does Toyata and Honda want you to buy a used car from a used car dealership?

NO they want you to buy a new one. Does it mean your stealing from Toyata and Honda because you didnt buy from them? Again no, thats simply retarded logic.

 

[FoolKiller]

I buy used.

Most of the games out there are not worth more than the $5 to $10 that I spend on them. There is no way I would play most of those if I had to pay $70 for it.

And it isn't as bad as piracy. This argument is stupid and has been done so many times.

The more the industry sticks their heads up their asses to try to nickel and dime their supporters, the more the supporters will rebel and do things against the industry.

Half the fun, especially growing up playing games, was buying a game and then sharing it with your friends. Now they have all these digital downloads, DRMs, locking of files to accounts and to specific machines. I just want to enjoy the game with my friends.

The next thing you know, your friends won't be allowed to come over to your house and play your games. Ugh.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I don't like buying used. I once bought a used game and it kept freezing up one me when I tried playing it.

That was when I decided that I like buying new better.

This is why I don't buy used. Buying a used game is buying a game with the invisible "Buyer Beware" sticker attached to it. I, however, see nothing wrong with buying a used video game. It is the same as if I went and bought a used book, movie, or car. Do you hear any of those industries crying about second hand sales?

While I can't deny that devs do end up losing out on money due to second hand sales think of the millions of books that are sold as second hand each year and the money each author and publishing company misses out on when someone purchases those. If you seek and end to used video game sales then you may as well rev up the campaign machine to end all second hand sales in the world and start burning down flea markets

i understand both your qualms here, but nearly every game place i know has a 30 day garuntee/warranty on it, so if the game isn't working right, then you can take it in for a new copy or store credit equal to that price, therefore that arguement is null

Actually no it doesn't make my argument null, and its rather shortsighted of you not to think through the return process. Getting a game that's so fucked up it doesn't function is a damned nuisance. When I buy a game I have no desire to trek back up to the mall and return the damn thing. It is a waste of time and gas, and if they don't have any other copies of that particular game that is in stock used I get my money back and still end up buying a new copy of it (depending on if its still in production I may end up not having a copy at all by the end of it). So in the end I may as well have bought new in the first place, thus saving myself the time and gas I wasted to go return the used copy.

Do I still buy used? Of course I do, sometimes there is no choice if a game is too old. (even on the internet those new copies you find its not the dev making money off those at that point)

well you can look at the game when you buy it, and all the places i know of dont take scratched up games, hell i tried to return one that worked through fine, but 'looked' really scratched up, and they wouldn't buy it, so im sorry if you live near a place where they sell that bad of used copies, because most people i know anyways treat their games nicely and dont scratch em up, and in the stores around me they test all their games right there to make sure they are use-able, so if you are doubting a game will work just ask them to test it right there, and do you live way out in the countryside or something? it takes me about 5-10 minutes if that to drive to the mall (which is even further away then the gametsore i go to) to go to that specific game store to check out their spot, and if they dont have any more in stock usually they call up all the otehr stores within a 20 mile radius (or city limits) to see if they have any copies, in which they usually do so i can just go their and get it if i absolutely need the game, or ask them to hold it for me for another day

yeha i could have thought it through a bit more, i just wanted to state that nearly all gaming places have a warranty or garuntee on the games that you buy used so its not really as bad as it sounds, buying used from ebay or amazon is much more of a gamble

 

[captain_Bubblebum]

Hey folks, history in the making right here with my first post ever on the escapist. Yay for me!

Right, so the statement in the creation of this thread is "Buying Used Games is just as Bad as Pirating". This is not true.

It is not just as bad because with pirating NO money is being supplied to the games industry.

When buying new games money is being given to a gamer who, having already purchased the game themselves, will most likely purchase another game from either a retailer (street shop or online shop) which would give money to the publisher (and) developer OR....

they then go and purchase a used game themselves, giving money to a gamer who...(cycle begins again).

With piracy NO money ever enters the games life cycle.

Actually, I would like to rephrase my previous statement to this...

"It is not just as bad because with pirating NO money is FUNDING the games industry."

And I would never for a moment consider it "bad" to give a fellow gamer money if it means I get to play/own a game.


EDIT: psrdirector said the exact same thing

 

[Assassin Xaero]

In fact its even worse financially but better economically. [sub]I know what those words mean so I can use them.[/sub]

Pirating is free and detracts one sale from the Devs. But with used games, your money goes to someone else (which is morally the right thing.)

To say pirating is hurting the industry more than used games is to be wrong. Because the only argument against Pirating is that it hurts the industry. Otherwise you shouldn't care what people do with their lives, used games are just as bad.

So, stealing something is "better" than paying for it? I can't afford to buy a new car since I'm 19, in college, and only have a part time job, so to help the economy I should go out and steal a new car instead of buying a used one?

 

[NeutralMunchHotel]

The thing is, would you rather pay £39.99 for Dragon Age Origins, or £22?

Since it's not illegal, and I will never meet the devs and as such have no personal opinion about them, the £22 option is far more attractive. That's the one I'll be taking this weekend.

 

[Crash486]

In fact its even worse financially but better economically. [sub]I know what those words mean so I can use them.[/sub]

Pirating is free and detracts one sale from the Devs. But with used games, your money goes to someone else (which is morally the right thing.)

To say pirating is hurting the industry more than used games is to be wrong. Because the only argument against Pirating is that it hurts the industry. Otherwise you shouldn't care what people do with their lives, used games are just as bad.

This is just untrue for 2 reasons.

1. On the side of the consumer, selling back used games stimulates the sale of new games. Consumers are more likely to buy new games at a "discount," therefore I'd argue that for every used game sold back to the retailer, there is most likely at least 1 new game purchased. Also, consumers who wait for games to come in pre-owned before purchasing them most likely never intended to pay full retail price for the game, therefore the industry is not actually losing anything.

2. The main reason why this statement is completely false is thus. Like it or not, game retailers are part of the video game industry. Sure they're not the individual studios or producers, but a part of the industry they are. Selling games used games generates an enormous profit margin for game retailers. Retailers actually make very little money on new games because there is very little overhead on them. Used games however have immense markup considering the buyback price vs the price the title is sold at.

Bottom line being, pre-owned sales make money for retailers, increasing their buying power for new games, which stimulates game sales. Its not like when you buy a new game, your money gets put into an envelope and shipped to the developer. Developers/producers make money off of game sales to distributors/retailers not to individual customers. So, in actuality, used game sales are very good for the industry because they enable sale of games to people with different levels of disposable income instead of there just being a price floor at $59.99.

This is a bullshit argument used by people who pirate games in order to justify their actions.

 

[LordZ]

Well you might think you "cant own a idea" but the law of the US says you can. *shrug* You might not like the law but it still the law.

Also Rentals used to have a unique place in the gaming industry as there was virtually no game demos for games that came out and renting a game was the only way to see if it was "buy worthy" before you actually bought it.

They are on a bit of a decline since game demos are easily and widely available via online features but talk to any gaming industry rep, they consider game rentals to be a form of advertising to the point where they make deals with company's like Blockbuster and Movie Gallery to get pre-street day copies and promote people to play and hopefully eventually buy their game.

But your right about one thing, lots of bs in this thread. OP's idiotic idea that the second hand game market is just the same as stealing. /facepalm

Also buying used does not = piracy not even by a long shot. Does Toyata and Honda want you to buy a used car from a used car dealership?

NO they want you to buy a new one. Does it mean your stealing from Toyata and Honda because you didnt buy from them? Again no, thats simply retarded logic.

Many consider piracy the best way to "demo" a game. I can see where they're coming from. Most demos are a shit comparison to the real game. Some demos are far worse and others are far better than the actual game. Renting are truly the best way to demo a game, since you are experiencing the real game and not the cracked version. Though, some games are so bad that I feel ripped off paying just to rent it. Also, it's unfortunate that a lot of games simply can't be rented. When you can't rent a game, can't buy used, don't have friends to "borrow" it from, it's easy to see how people would resort to "piracy" to find out if a game is worth buying.

I know how this sounds but piracy is only illegal because there's a law against it. The point is, just because there's a law doesn't make it right. Piracy is about on level with jay walking. There's a law against it but most people do it. It's not really a good idea to do either but throwing people in jail or sticking them with stiff fines for it is an equally bad idea.

 

[teisjm]

Well apart form one detail.

In order for someone to buy a used game, someone else had to buy it new first.

With piracy, everyone can make infinite copies a single legit copy of a game, with used games, only one person can use that legit copy at a time, and i doubt a used game goes through the hands of as a many people as a pirated game.

You can Pirate a game on release day, sometimes even before, but used games require someone else to buy it, play it and then trade it back in before you can buy it used.

So i don't think your statement is true.

Also, why put up a difference between ecomony and finance, which you seem to be pretty aware that a lot of us might not know about (the difference) and then say you do, without further explanation.
I don't understand that part of your post.

I know that both used games, and pirated games bring no money to the devs, but i fail to follow your thoughts beyond that.

 

[literallyanythingelse]

This is such BS - if you buy a second-hand film, is that worse than downloading it? Does that make you feel bad because you 'stole' from the flm makers? The difference is second-hand is legal. So the devs don't get the money. And? They did the first time round.

 

[Wewk]

In fact its even worse financially but better economically. [sub]I know what those words mean so I can use them.[/sub]

Pirating is free and detracts one sale from the Devs. But with used games, your money goes to someone else (which is morally the right thing.)

To say pirating is hurting the industry more than used games is to be wrong. Because the only argument against Pirating is that it hurts the industry. Otherwise you shouldn't care what people do with their lives, used games are just as bad.

So, stealing something is "better" than paying for it? I can't afford to buy a new car since I'm 19, in college, and only have a part time job, so to help the economy I should go out and steal a new car instead of buying a used one?

You're missing one aspect though. When you pirate a game, you don't actually take it. You make a copy.
I'd give out free copies of my car gladly, if I only had a car to start with.

 

[LordZ]

In fact its even worse financially but better economically. [sub]I know what those words mean so I can use them.[/sub]

Pirating is free and detracts one sale from the Devs. But with used games, your money goes to someone else (which is morally the right thing.)

To say pirating is hurting the industry more than used games is to be wrong. Because the only argument against Pirating is that it hurts the industry. Otherwise you shouldn't care what people do with their lives, used games are just as bad.

flaw, Used games in order to be that means they were new at one point. This means the devs did get a sale and profits at one point. Also alot of people who turn in used gmaes do so to buy new games, allowing them to purchase more new games. As long as people buy used games companies wil give discounts on new games to people who turn them in.

So it is moraly better, and anyone who pirates is scum.

Hey folks, history in the making right here with my first post ever on the escapist. Yay for me!

Right, so the statement in the creation of this thread is "Buying Used Games is just as Bad as Pirating". This is not true.

It is not just as bad because with pirating NO money is being supplied to the games industry.

When buying new games money is being given to a gamer who, having already purchased the game themselves, will most likely purchase another game from either a retailer (street shop or online shop) which would give money to the publisher (and) developer OR....

they then go and purchase a used game themselves, giving money to a gamer who...(cycle begins again).

With piracy NO money ever enters the games life cycle.

Actually, I would like to rephrase my previous statement to this...

"It is not just as bad because with pirating NO money is FUNDING the games industry."

And I would never for a moment consider it "bad" to give a fellow gamer money if it means I get to play/own a game.


EDIT: psrdirector said the exact same thing

You are both wrong. Creating a cracked copy isn't magic. They had to get the copy they originally cracked from somewhere. Usually, this means they bought the game, cracked it, then released it. I suppose there may be some that will physically go steal it from a store to crack it but I don't know of anyone actually doing that. It would be awfully hypocritical for a crack group to tell people to support a game by buying it, if they like it, if they themselves physically stole it. As it happens, that message is left in the release notes of many crack groups.

 

[LordZ]

Well apart form one detail.

In order for someone to buy a used game, someone else had to buy it new first.

With piracy, everyone can make infinite copies a single legit copy of a game, with used games, only one person can use that legit copy at a time, and i doubt a used game goes through the hands of as a many people as a pirated game.

You can Pirate a game on release day, sometimes even before, but used games require someone else to buy it, play it and then trade it back in before you can buy it used.

So i don't think your statement is true.

Also, why put up a difference between ecomony and finance, which you seem to be pretty aware that a lot of us might not know about (the difference) and then say you do, without further explanation.
I don't understand that part of your post.

I know that both used games, and pirated games bring no money to the devs, but i fail to follow your thoughts beyond that.

You conveniently ignore rented games that can go through a new owner every other day. Also, it's not theoretically impossible that a single used game could see hundreds or even thousands of owners. In theory, it would be easy for a game that was either really bad or really short to see a lot of turn around.