Poll: Do you hate the used game market?

[MartialArc]

I get that people hate piracy here. And I understand why, it hurts developers, it is not fair, etc. However something I find odd is that from time to time you will see folks lump in the used market with piracy.

They will complain that it doesn't help benefit the developers and that makes it bad. But in life we resell many things. You wouldn't just let a car sit around doing nothing when buying a new one, generally anyway. You don't torch your house when you are done with it. You don't burn your books upon finishing them.

I always have felt that software companies are trying to play the field in such a way that they can treat their product as some kind of dual-existance.

You pirated a game?! Thats stealing, just as sure as if you held us at gunpoint. You bought the game? No no no, it is intellectual property, you did not buy it, we just lent it to you.

I see a one common explanation for the objection to the used market, that development is stupidly expensive. When you buy a car, they have to design that too. I would venture that the cost of bringing a roadway vehicle from concept to production eclipses that of your typical AAA game. Game companies get many many advantages here, namely they have only fixed costs (practically speaking, few more years and digital distribution will bring this close to literally speaking). Ford doesn't get to design a truck then crap out each copy for pennies, each unit has a cost associated with it above and beyond fixed costs.

Am I the only one who feels this attitude permeates these forums?

Does anyone have an explanation for why video games should be treated differently than every other commodity in existance basically?

 

[ace_of_something]

No, because it's legal. If the publishers want to work around it they should find ways to make people carry 'licenses' to sell their used products (kind of like cars) so they can get a piece of the used money. Most games are outrageously priced and I've got a mortgage so I'll buy used very often.
You can't argue I'm taking their money because chances are in many instances I won't buy a game AT ALL if I can't find it used. So either way they're not getting anything out of me.
That being said I use a local chain of stores. Not gamestop who charges literally twice as much for most used titles.

 

[KeyMaster45]

I don't mind the used games market, granted I'm very wary of it because you never know how well people took care of their discs. It does help me feel slightly vindicated when I purchase a game I don't enjoy. Granted I'll never get the money back for it but going back to gamestop a few weeks or months later to trade it in towards another game is gratifying, even if it only covers the tax. I may not have liked the game but it did help me buy a new one so kudos all around I suppose.

 

[riprino]

I offset my buying used games by buying dlcs and arcade games

 

[MartialArc]

The only problem with places like GameStop is that a game may produice a sale milliouns of times, but it only counts if they are new copies. GameStop buys your games for dirt cheap, marks it up 300-400% and makes some ice profits.

Piracy isnt when you download a games ISO and then mount/play it.
Piracy is stealing shit on the high seas.

This is true of anything you might sell. 2 million Chevy's might be sold in a year. They only see money from new sales. Not a single solitary soul says you shouldn't buy a used car because of the impact on GM. And nobody spews hate at used car lots because they make money on used cars (just because they sold them a lemon). Go look on Kelly blue book and compare a trade in price to buying used price. It's a pretty hefty spread.

 

[Katana314]

I certainly think much worse of a game pirater than I do of a used-game buyer. I'm mostly fine with the latter. But eventually, I really do hope for them to realize the impact they make; because as mean as it sounds, their effects are just the same as piracy.

I'd like to stop the car argument here because I don't see it as so comparable; for every single individual car that goes out the factory doors, there is a large cost associated AS WELL as the research and redesign costs. Plus, that car company is not maintaining the roads for you.

So a possibly more comparable concept is candy. Let's say a nice, 6-hour singleplayer game were like a delicious candy bar, except it costs $50. You pay the $50, chomp it down, and it's very satisfying. For you, though, that candy bar is now useless; in a singleplayer game there's not much point to going through it all again.

Now what if you could take that "expired" candy wrapper, and hand it off to someone else for $45? They too would get the gooey, creamy center, and all the enjoyment of an unopened candy bar, but for a lesser price, and only one person has paid the price of the candy.

The problem here is that the only real cost associated with games is the design and production cost; making one more box, disc, and manual, is pretty much incomparable to all the work and possible debt they went into making it. The end morality is clear: This disc is a token to enjoy our game. If you like our game and play through it, we deserve to have YOUR money.

 

[Azure Sky]

While I am usually the type of person that grabs the first-hand copy of games. (Wait, whats this first-hand copy... It's not in my Steam-o-cabulary)

The used market definitely has its place though, as there would be no other way to obtain out-of-print games.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

No real problem with it, as I buy games new. I also don't mind game content that you have to pay for if the game is used, but you get for free if it is new.

The used game market is also a way to get rid of games you hated and allow others who might enjoy them to play them.

 

[LostTimeLady]

I hate it for the extortionate price of Shadow of the Collosus on the new and used section of Amazon.

I kid.

The second hand games market is great for finding older titles that publishers have actually stopped making.

Sure for new titles, given a choice between two identically priced game discs, one brand new and one used, I'd go for the new copy cos actually I'm not the biggest fan in the world of scratched discs. But for old titles, horray for the used game market.

 

[Jonluw]

I don't hate it, but I don't like it either.
I want the developers I like to receive money from me.

 

[Jakub324]

Most of my games are used. I only really buy new if a gae is REALLY good (e.g. Just Cause 2)

 

[Zukhramm]

Cheaper games: I'm happy.

 

[EightGaugeHippo]

The problem most people have with it is that rather than the company who made the game getting money, the store who resells it as pre owned gets all profit.

But I personally dont see the problem with that. The reason I dont, can be explained by a simplified version of the industry:

-If say the game devs make some copies of a game and sell them to a store, they get profit.
-When the store then sells the game new, the devs AND the store get a share of profit.
-When a game is returned to the store and is put on the pre-owned shelf, only the store gets profit.

Its much more complicated than that (I didn't take into account the cost to make and manufacture the game for simplicities sake), I know, but it keeps things in balance.

[Edit]

I don't hate it, but I don't like it either.
I want the developers I like to receive money from me.

If you want developers to receive your money buy the game new at full price.

 

[HalfChance]

Why would I hate the used game market? Sure the games publishers and developers don't see any return on these pre-owned titles but I'm sure they will soon make that back once I have purchased all of the DLC. Besides £19.99 for a game is a friggin' bargain.

 

[sylekage]

I'm one of those people who doesn't like dropping 60 bucks for one thing. I'd rather buy three or four games for the price of one. Sure, the new game is flashy and looks fun, but this ten dollar game looks even more fun! I can wait a year or two for the game to get reduced or to get a used version for a lot less. I'm cheap like that

 

[MartialArc]

I certainly think much worse of a game pirater than I do of a used-game buyer. I'm mostly fine with the latter. But eventually, I really do hope for them to realize the impact they make; because as mean as it sounds, their effects are just the same as piracy.

I'd like to stop the car argument here because I don't see it as so comparable; for every single individual car that goes out the factory doors, there is a large cost associated AS WELL as the research and redesign costs. Plus, that car company is not maintaining the roads for you.

So a possibly more comparable concept is candy. Let's say a nice, 6-hour singleplayer game were like a delicious candy bar, except it costs $50. You pay the $50, chomp it down, and it's very satisfying. For you, though, that candy bar is now useless; in a singleplayer game there's not much point to going through it all again.

Now what if you could take that "expired" candy wrapper, and hand it off to someone else for $45? They too would get the gooey, creamy center, and all the enjoyment of an unopened candy bar, but for a lesser price, and only one person has paid the price of the candy.

The problem here is that the only real cost associated with games is the design and production cost; making one more box, disc, and manual, is pretty much incomparable to all the work and possible debt they went into making it. The end morality is clear: This disc is a token to enjoy our game. If you like our game and play through it, we deserve to have YOUR money.

A candy bar is consumed once. A game can be used over and over and over. A car can be used over and over, but is certainly more consumable than a game. And like I said, designing a car is assuredly more expensive than designing a game. AND THEN they have to pay per unit. It is much harder to start producing a car and make money than games. This is why you don't see many indy car companies.

The game manufacturer isn't maintaining the internet, or the console, so why are roads even mentioned here?

The fact that the fixed costs are basically all the costs involved with marketing a game is kind of the point. Since they can make unlimited copies for next to nothing, it is much easier for them to recoup.

Product A costs $40 to produce, and sells for $50. Fixed costs for the company equal $50 million.

Product B costs $1 to produce, and sells for $50. Fixed costs for the company equal $50 million.

Who do you think is gonna have an easier time making their money back?

 

[JedivsPaper]

No becuase i cant afford to dish out £40-£30 for a new game. The money already went to the developer when someone else bought it so, how exacatly are they losing out?

 

[ramboondiea]

well the majority of my games are used or from a third party in one way or another so i like it, and i any body has a problem with me buying second hand they can fuck off ha