The correct (aka less jerkish) way to combat used sales.
- Thread starter RedEyesBlackGamer
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That would be the best idea. Just lower the price. But that will never happen without an industry crash.Irridium said:
A really good one. Giving discounts on future DLC to consumers who buy new rewards them while not alienating used buyers.CM156 said:
Yeah. I think Owyn_Merrilin put it best: if you are really in that much danger of used sales and you can't possibly compete with them then you deserve to go out of business. It is most telling because you only see triple AAA publishers pulling this stuff and complaining. I don't see indie developers acting like this.viranimus said:
That kind of attitude isn't the most welcoming to customers: "You should be lucky that we let you access our product that much." is the message that they send. Customers should expect to get the full product. Is it really so bad that getting everything on the disk at purchase is considered a reward?Sober Thal said:
I completely agree, and every since I heard about them charging extra like this, I've been saying how we as gamers cant let this happen. Look at what 2K did with Bioshock 2, had dlc on the disk we had to pay to unlock, and capcom does that too. I honestly say, boycott. It worked with Battle Field 3, and if we stick to ours guns, and not do what we did with Modern Warfare, or left 4 dead 2 we can make a change.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Movie industry, television industry, book industry, music industry. These all are relevant media and none of them are fighting the used market like this.Stall said:
Except when A: the Publisher wants to pad its profit margins, B: it doesnt benefit the developers, C: it tries to change the nature of the industry and tries to remove legal rights of ownership, D: it hurts more people overall by screwing over secondary industries. I can go on, but theres no point.
Legal DOES mean its Ok. Ownership laws are in place because corporations invariably will use any means at their disposal to pad their profit margins Including using a pathetically thin sob story to illict undue sympathy out of their customers so their customers will defend the corporation. Please dont kid yourself. The gaming industry is more profitable than the film industry and is one of the most profitable industries period. Allowing publishers to shirk the law and letting them double dip revenues sets a horrible precedent that not only effects industries other than the gaming industry, it doesnt "support the artist" it makes rich people even richer.
Thankfully we have historical documents that detail what happens when you let companies have undue power.
"Reward consumers who buy new instead of punishing those that buy used."
For most people, it works either way, although I like to think of the word "punishing" as intentional. That is, someone cannot punish someone unintentionally. What is supposed to be a reward cannot be interpreted as a punishment, unless of course, it was intended to be both.
For most people, it works either way, although I like to think of the word "punishing" as intentional. That is, someone cannot punish someone unintentionally. What is supposed to be a reward cannot be interpreted as a punishment, unless of course, it was intended to be both.
None of that addresses mine and a lot of peoples' problem. I'm still punished by these incentives because I thought getting the Dragon Age 2 soundtrack would be neat but it's an internet download. So unless they start packing hard copy incentives again (not likely) it still just punishes people who buy the game new but don't have whatever internet service is required. It's still a large portion of the people. I could stomach it until they started cordoning off sections of gameplay. I don't care how small, it's principle. Now I can't even enjoy the vanilla experience of the game without getting online and I bought it new? No thanks. The only satisfactory answer is to stop combating second-hand sales entirely and no one is going to do that so I and people in my situation are marginalized and I'm sick of it.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
How about the automobile industry? Similar concept with the used car market. Why buy new when used is cheaper? The manufacturers have no way to stop used car sales, but they aren't trying to remove features from used cars to make their new products seem better. You can't use competition as a reason to screw people for not buying your product. If any other industry tried to do that it would get slapped so hard they would be able to see backwards. There is no reason this kind of thing should be allowed in the games industry just because they can program that kind of draconian feature. Either follow the PC games market and make games unusable after installation or stop using asinine concepts that restrict legitimate customers. The reason people are pissed about this is because it takes away content from anyone buying the game used. People need to remember that most new game sales happen in the first six weeks. Why should consumers who buy used two years from now be punished? If publishers want more money then they should focus on sales in those first six weeks and not trying to lash out at everyone who doesn't buy their game new. Pirates will still pirate and get the whole game and used game buyers will still buy used games as long as they are still sold. Nothing short of making used games unplayable will eliminate the used games market.Stall said:
I completely agree. Almost every other entertainment media that tried this sort of scheme has abandoned it.viranimus said:
Basically, the Super Meat Boys stance on the subject of used games and pirates.
"Fuck it. If big time publishers can't even fight them, what chance do we have? We'll just focus on making fun, interesting games."
Thats the gist of what they said, you see, there IS no way to do this without it being a dick move, since these will never go away.
"Fuck it. If big time publishers can't even fight them, what chance do we have? We'll just focus on making fun, interesting games."
Thats the gist of what they said, you see, there IS no way to do this without it being a dick move, since these will never go away.
What? And the poor, innocent, used game market is somehow immune from your charges about corporations? You are the one sitting here defending them as well. Aren't THEY corporations too? You shouldn't kid yourself either... you are unsubtly guilty of the exact same thing you are accusing me of. Look in a mirror before you start throwing around accusations.viranimus said:
The rest of your post is nothing but slippery slop logical fallacies... implying that the big, mean gaming corporations will have massive amounts of "undue power" if they are allowed to legitimately fight the used game market.
And publishers are doing just that. They are rewarding people who purchase their game new with additional content. As it stands right now, people who purchase the game new get a better product.Zetion said:
I can sympathize. And the soundtracks are physical products. Requiring verification online is an inconsiderate move. I couldn't access ME2's and DA:O's content even though I bought them new because I can't connect to LIVE. It is the reason that I love bonus stuff to be physical items like artbooks instead of DLC.Inkidu said:
Edit: The examples I gave had physical extras, no digital extras.
Dropping prices wouldn't help used would still be cheaper and as to Todd Howard's comment that games should be 20 dollars ok so who's going to take that hit and its not feasible to expect games to triple their sales numbers to make up the difference take COD for example anyone who wants it is going to get it theres not a lot of people holding off on buying a COD game its the same for any game true you'd probably get more people to buy it but your simply not going to triple your sales and no one is willing to make a product at a loss for long, at the 20 dollar price point you'd never get a AAA title they'd never make it back.
The only way to combat used sales is to offer either additional content for buying new which is pretty standard at this point, have a pass required for dlc or multiplayer components which is becoming the norm, both create an incentive to either buy new or wait for a further price drop. You won't get those that can't afford new without killing your profits since it would require a large price drop and you won't get those looking for a bargain unless you make buying used expensive to get everything they'd get new or to offer a worthwhile extra of around the used vs new difference.
The only way to combat used sales is to offer either additional content for buying new which is pretty standard at this point, have a pass required for dlc or multiplayer components which is becoming the norm, both create an incentive to either buy new or wait for a further price drop. You won't get those that can't afford new without killing your profits since it would require a large price drop and you won't get those looking for a bargain unless you make buying used expensive to get everything they'd get new or to offer a worthwhile extra of around the used vs new difference.
Used cars "remove features" by adding wear and tear on the automobile, as well as not getting the manufacturer's warranty anymore. So in short, when you buy your car used, you are getting an inferior product when compared to a new car. Why should games be any different? Why are people expecting a used game to be of equal quality as a new game? If we want to start extending analogies to other industries, then it totally breaks down over this facet. All this day-1 DLC stuff is doing is making games like cars-- the used product is inferior to the new one. It's entitled and ignorant of gamers to expect that the used product be just as good as the new one. Why should a used buyer get the exact same thing as a new buyer, when the new buyer is not only paying more money, but directly supporting the makers and publisher of the game?hyzaku said:
It's rewarding people who buy new, but punishing people who buy used. If I buy this game new, then I get extra content. This is a reward, is it not? If you don't buy it new, then you don't get that content.Zetion said:
As for the car analogy, refer to my above paragraph. Why are used games expected to be equal to new games? Used cars aren't equal to new cars.