Poll: The End of the Used Game Resale is Nigh! (bring out your dead .. Ding)

[BreakfastMan]

Used games, to me, are very important. Not so much being able to sell them back, but more so how cheap and plentiful they are. Let me explain: I am a poor student. I have very little cash to actually spend on games. If I could only buy brand new, $60 games, I could only afford to get 1 game per quarter, that is how poor I am. As such, I tend to buy a lot of older, cheaper games who are often used. You know, stuff that is anywhere from $5-$15. I am still buying old PS2 games. If the used game market is eliminated, I won't really have any way get those games. I mean, look at 5-10 years down the line. Most PS2 games that you can find in stores are used. What happens to the X-Box 720, or whatever, games 5-10 years down the line? You can't find them, because there are no used copies and few new ones. Keeping a game able to be played used is, in my mind, a long term investment, and I think it is foolish to ignore that.

 

[sophiebelle]

If it's unauthorized distribution, then yes. Unauthorized distribution is a lot like going to an all-you-can-eat buffet and ordering only one meal for your whole party. Just because you purchased something for yourself to use does not give you permission to share it any way you please, especially if it's against the intentions of the original distributor.

So my answer to this goes on a per-case basis, where it depends on whether or not the producer is okay with your distribution techniques. If they want to say that you can only buy the game so long as you never play it on Saturdays, so be it. They're the producer, so they're allowed to impose restrictions like that.

 

[Awexsome]

I really call some BS on this rumor. I know publishers and used games have never gotten along but a move like this would be a PR disaster. I'd just stick with the online pass stuff if i were them. It's a good, small way to get some money to go back to the devs and pubs who the industry needs more than Gamestop. Just ignore the whiners calling it an evil shady business practice because it's not.

If it's unauthorized distribution, then yes. Unauthorized distribution is a lot like going to an all-you-can-eat buffet and ordering only one meal for your whole party. Just because you purchased something for yourself to use does not give you permission to share it any way you please, especially if it's against the intentions of the original distributor.

That's like the best analogy I've heard towards this issue in a long time. Kudos on that.

 

[BreakfastMan]

If it's unauthorized distribution, then yes. Unauthorized distribution is a lot like going to an all-you-can-eat buffet and ordering only one meal for your whole party. Just because you purchased something for yourself to use does not give you permission to share it any way you please, especially if it's against the intentions of the original distributor.

So my answer to this goes on a per-case basis, where it depends on whether or not the producer is okay with your distribution techniques. If they want to say that you can only buy the game so long as you never play it on Saturdays, so be it. They're the producer, so they're allowed to impose restrictions like that.

That really only works if you look at it through the angle of "licensing software" instead of "purchasing and owning software". Once I purchase a book, I own it, and can do practically anything I want (within legal restrictions, of course). I can resell it, loan it to friends, use it as toilet paper, or make a hat out of it. Me, and many other people, think game-sales should be more like book sales. Indeed, most are.

 

[Savagezion]

*le snip*

Now as for why anyone would buy used vs new. I think that's a simple answer. It's because when people buy used games, from Gamestop at least, they are actually able to return their product within seven days with no questions asked. This means if it sucks, they beat it and it has no replay value, they don't like it, they need the money for something else, etc they can take back their game and get something else or their money.

... they beat it... need the money for something else...

You lost me. Has the world become so sad and the people so tight with their money that they're willing to effectively rent a game for free like that?

And about needing the money for something else - here's a world-shattering idea - budget properly and know what you can and can't afford before you go out jacking up your credit card.

The main reason people will do this is the first one, "because it sucks". However, the other reasons are no different than someone "buying" a $200 cocktail dress/blazer just for an event and then returning it within the 3-day return policy. This isn't something unique to the game's market.

The world has always been "that sad". People like "something for nothing", which is why advertisers use the word "FREE" in large bold print to get consumers in the door. Even Steam offers free stuff for a short time to get people to log in with hopes they will buy something when they do.

Good on you for supporting your beloved retail stores by getting a refund on a game because you got bored with it, mind.

Good on you for supporting the idea that a consumer is not allowed to be unsatisfied with a product in lieu of the fact they aren't able to playtest it and apparently the advertising can go to great lengths to mislead, mind. Effectively, demonizing a consumer for being unhappy with a product they had interest in.

 

[sophiebelle]

That really only works if you look at it through the angle of "licensing software" instead of "purchasing and owning software". Once I purchase a book, I own it, and can do practically anything I want (within legal restrictions, of course). I can resell it, loan it to friends, use it as toilet paper, or make a hat out of it. Me, and many other people, think game-sales should be more like book sales. Indeed, most are.

Quite right. You are only licensing most software. Have you never clicked through a "license agreement," or read on the back of most game cases where it says that you're only licensed to play the game, and leads you to a place where you can read such a license agreement (for instance, on the back of LittleBigPlanet, it says "Software License terms available at www.us.playstation.com/support/useragreement").

 

[Savagezion]

If it's unauthorized distribution, then yes. Unauthorized distribution is a lot like going to an all-you-can-eat buffet and ordering only one meal for your whole party. Just because you purchased something for yourself to use does not give you permission to share it any way you please, especially if it's against the intentions of the original distributor.

So my answer to this goes on a per-case basis, where it depends on whether or not the producer is okay with your distribution techniques. If they want to say that you can only buy the game so long as you never play it on Saturdays, so be it. They're the producer, so they're allowed to impose restrictions like that.

I would say that relates more to piracy. Used games would be more drawn out. For instance, you go to a restaurant and can't eat there unless you buy a "ticket" that allows you a to eat there for a year. You eat there twice then decide you don't really like their menu like you thought you would. So you sell the "ticket" to a friend at a discount to recoup some of the money you spent on it. Your friend could have just got it from the restaurant, and supported the owners and your ticket would go to waste.
However, the restaurant had sold the ticket assuming that someone would be eating there for a year - regardless of who did, just that they would. The reason that is important is because it reflects the market's potential based on the service provided. If the service was good enough that both of you would want to eat there, 2 tickets would be needed. When something is returned, a sale is lost obviously. When something is sold off due to a customer's dissatisfaction, a sale was simply never confirmed or solidified. Their "sale" is now drifting in the market until it finds someone is willing to confirm it.

 

[AT God]

This is what interests me, PC gamers cannot do this, they never have been able to. There aren't any retailers who reuse CD keys. For old games that don't require internet connections, a CD key could be reused but the last game I found that used that system was StarCraft Brood War. I cannot sell my extra copies of Battlefield 1942 to Gamestop, so why haven't I campaigned and made my own poll to get that right?

I understand how console gamers aren't going to be happy that they will have to pay full price, but maybe if you paid full price in the first place, the price wouldn't be so high. A lot of PC games, even ones that are ported to the console, are for sale at $50 dollars on Steam while $60 dollars for a console. Who knows, you might only have to pay $50 dollars, or even less, in the future.

Also, my own opinion so anyone uninterested can quit reading here, the used games are harming the quality of games as a whole. Millions of copies of the new Call of Duty are sold at full price, meaning they can continue to make their millions while not making their games any better. I think Infinity Ward is doing fine financially, and I don't hold it against them, if I could sell a reskin and a new gamemode for 60 dollars to a million people with a small crew of game designers I would do it all day because money is awesome, but I am getting off topic.

My point is, people are going to cough up the full price for a new Call of Duty because they know that if they liked the previous they will like the new. However people aren't willing to risk 60 bucks on a game they aren't sure about, such as Metro 2033 which was a great game and yet didn't sell very well. People will wait until they can buy it used, so the Metro 2033 developers, 4A games I think, do not get their share of their own sales. Its hard to make it so people cannot sell their old games, but its at least equally unfair for a game developer to not get money for their own product.

One possible solution that no one with any authority will take notice of, how about you make games become tradeable after a certain time has passed? If you, as a greedy developer, have made a sequel to your game in a year, make the older one tradeable. Or have a certain cool-down time for game trading, something in the Xbox/PS4's magical almost PC quality brain unlock games to be traded.

I think if you guys manage to prevent this antiused game software, then it should mean I should be able to sell my old PC games to Gamestop. We should start our own petition!

EDIT: I do not know how accurate these figures are now, but I researched the software piracy rates last year and I found something like 20% of software is pirated in the US, more than 50% of game sales were from used games. 20%<50%, so the piracy arguements I am seeing don't hold weight, assuming my numbers are still correct which I cannot attest to.

 

[MagmaMan]

I personally try and buy the game new whenever I can. If the game is still available in stores new I'll gladly buy it new. You have all failed to mention games that are older. I have nothing against buying or selling older games that no longer can be purchased new, and prefer to buy them new when I can and the money is going to the developers. You people realize when you don't support the developers it costs them alot of money. Of course, there are games like CoD where it's not going to matter, but other games such as War for Cybertron need all the support for the developer that they can get.

 

[Something Amyss]

This is what interests me, PC gamers cannot do this, they never have been able to. There aren't any retailers who reuse CD keys. For old games that don't require internet connections, a CD key could be reused but the last game I found that used that system was StarCraft Brood War. I cannot sell my extra copies of Battlefield 1942 to Gamestop, so why haven't I campaigned and made my own poll to get that right?

You're looking at it backwards. You already had the right. just because you're not exercising the right doesn't mean you don't have it.

 

[sophiebelle]

When something is sold off due to a customer's dissatisfaction, a sale was simply never confirmed or solidified. Their "sale" is now drifting in the market until it finds someone is willing to confirm it.

That's only the case if there was a satisfaction guarantee made. Many consumer products, including most games, do not come with a satisfaction guarantee.

 

[razer17]

If used games go the way of the dodo, it will be a real shame. All the high street stores will die. Game Inc. almost went under, imagine if they didn't have the used games, they'd definitely go under.

I buy a lot of used games, since I can't afford to buy all my games new. I'd buy even less new games if I couldn't trade in. As such, if used games die, I may well switch to PC gaming for good. Not only are the games cheaper in general, they have a lot more variety. They have mods, indie game bundles, and piracy.

Also, I always felt that a lot of the reason that games were more expensive on consoles was because they could be resold. Am I wrong in thinking this, or will they put the price down on console games?

 

[Savagezion]

When something is sold off due to a customer's dissatisfaction, a sale was simply never confirmed or solidified. Their "sale" is now drifting in the market until it finds someone is willing to confirm it.

That's only the case if there was a satisfaction guarantee made. Many consumer products, including most games, do not come with a satisfaction guarantee.

That would only be true if returning the game based on satisfaction was possible. However, we all know returning software is not on the table, under any circumstances, once the seal is broken. Satisfaction guarantee is irrelevant in this regard. It comes down down to the game's "worth" in the market, which happens to be based on consumer satisfaction. (i.e. demand)

 

[Epona]

*le snip*

Now as for why anyone would buy used vs new. I think that's a simple answer. It's because when people buy used games, from Gamestop at least, they are actually able to return their product within seven days with no questions asked. This means if it sucks, they beat it and it has no replay value, they don't like it, they need the money for something else, etc they can take back their game and get something else or their money.

... they beat it... need the money for something else...

You lost me. Has the world become so sad and the people so tight with their money that they're willing to effectively rent a game for free like that?

And about needing the money for something else - here's a world-shattering idea - budget properly and know what you can and can't afford before you go out jacking up your credit card.

Good on you for supporting your beloved retail stores by getting a refund on a game because you got bored with it, mind.

Actually, the publishers have become so greedy that they want to mislead consumer via marketing while offering no return policy and on top of that, trying to destroy used sales so every consumer is stuck with paying full price with no return policy. Rentals would also be destroyed if there was a way for used games not to run on the new consoles leaving the consumer with nothing except paid off reviews and misleading advertising to help them decide.

It really is sad that some consumers hate themselves so much that they care more about the bottom line of multi-million dollar corporations more than they care about themselves and fellow consumers.

 

[Epona]

That really only works if you look at it through the angle of "licensing software" instead of "purchasing and owning software". Once I purchase a book, I own it, and can do practically anything I want (within legal restrictions, of course). I can resell it, loan it to friends, use it as toilet paper, or make a hat out of it. Me, and many other people, think game-sales should be more like book sales. Indeed, most are.

Quite right. You are only licensing most software. Have you never clicked through a "license agreement," or read on the back of most game cases where it says that you're only licensed to play the game, and leads you to a place where you can read such a license agreement (for instance, on the back of LittleBigPlanet, it says "Software License terms available at www.us.playstation.com/support/useragreement").

The license agreement has exactly as much power as you give it or as the publisher can exert. For example, you can still resell console games because the publisher has no means to prevent it, they can't use the police to enforce it. On the other hand, they have managed to use online DRM to prevent the resell of PC games. Again, the police had no hand in it.

The license agreement is more like a wish list, it isn't legally binding. Ask yourself this, how can Gamestop be in business if the law was behind the publishers?

 

[Dr. Dice Lord]

This whole 100% digital thing is the reason I won't be wasting money on the "next-next-gen" consoles. A slightly biased bit of advice, if you have the money for an $800 console on launch, buy a PC. You'll have more freedom and probably be happier in the long run.

As for the "end of used games?" I don't see this as being anywhere near as bad as people are making it out to be. Around where I live there are at least four used game stores that have, almost exclusively, old used PC titles, rows and rows of every cartridge game design produced, old used consoles and refurbished old game controllers. Of their entire stock I'd say "next-gen" products make up a mere 10-15% of their merchandise. I'm disappointed this will hurt some stores, but it will just encourage more privately owned shops to become specialized. Just another market adaptation, inevitable eventually.

 

[Merrick_HLC]

Honestly I think doing something like this would be a major cutting off the nose to spite the face style maneuver.

Put simply.

New games are very expensive to most people.
As much as folks may go "Well if you wait a while the price will come down." I doubt most bigger companies would really do THAT much of a price drop.

Maybe I'm remembering things wrong, but in the pre-piracy days, I admit I kept less of an eye on prices (It was mommy & daddy buying games for me) but I don't remember game prices seeming to come noticeably down unless the game was not a big seller or the sequels were out.

This will raise the cost of getting into the hobby.
When you combine the cost of a new system with the idea you'll probably ALWAYS be paying $70-$80 (Let's face it game prices aren't likely to DROP for new games with new consoles)for a new game?

I think it'd mean lots less people will be buying the games to begin with.

Gaming is a hobby to most people, and the more expensive a hobby gets, the more even lifelong fans will abandon it.
Just look at comic books.
A 'bestselling' coming today does HORRIBLE numbers compared to a few years ago.
And while SOME of that is 'speculator' market was bigger back then (thus more copies sold to be 'saved to sell later') a large part of it is comics cost so damn much now no one buys unless they're a 'comic geek' (yes I am one)