The Only RIGHT way to kill second hand games

[the_green_dragon]

Hello Fellow Gamers!

I was just thinking about the way game developers have been trying to screw 2nd hand game sales with their DLC and multiplayer lock-out and I feel that this is the wrong way to try and hurt 2nd hand sales, or at least try and get money from second hand sales.

I stand by the opinion that they don't really deserve money from second hand sales since NO other companies get 2nd hand sales money, you know, cars, DVDs, pretty much everything. Now I keep hearing the "Its Capitalism! GO CAPITALISM" arguements. I'm not a big fan of that arguement but I'm not here to debate that. I just wanted to say that the way PC games work on Steam and Xbox arcade games are the way to go. PC gamers who buy games on steam have no resale on it, same as xbox live arcade, it's data on your hard-drive, you cant trade that in. Which is FINE because the games are generally cheaper! I bought a bunch of Xbox arcade games and Steam games for cheap! like $15 to $25 (Australian), I'm happy with that but when you try and sell a game at Full price and still want to money grab from 2nd hand sales, well screw you!

 

[Michael Hirst]

But once you have a complete market of single sale games then the price can be strongly dictated by the publishers. This means there would be no competition for lower prices and the result would be static prices on all games that only harm the consumer it would take a long time until the games dropped to a platinum range with a reasonable price on them if at all. having competition as you say "GO CAPITALISM" stimulates competition between different groups and forces them to accomodate for their audience whereas the method of their being no competition says "Buy the game or get lost kid" and I bet good money it would lead to an overall reduction in sales becuase consumers would feel like they were being bullied into the higher price and wouldn't feel like they can get any of that money back with a trade in.

AT THE CURRENT TIME Steam and Xbox Live are in competition with other methods of sale and CANT OFFER the trade in option therefore they lower their prices BECAUSE OF COMPETITION from these other places. If everyone had the same method of selling then there would be no need to compete with anyone and prices could be dictated and remain static (Just look at Star Craft 2)

You see by investing in a full price game right now a lot of people can comfort themselves with the idea that if it's a short game or they get bored of it pretty quick they have to choice to trade that game in to get some money off the next game.

An often missed point in this debate is DLC, not day 1 DLC or buy new only DLC. Just the solid actual DLC that's released after a few months. With games like Fallout 3 and New Vegas players want to keep holding onto their games for the promise of buying furhter expansions, something they can't do if they trade their game in. (and here's the fucking mindblower, even if the consumer originally bought a pre-owned copy of the game any DLC they buy is brand new and goes straight to the publishers/devs)

The best way to kill the second hand market is to make games that people don't want to trade in straight away. It's crazy but some games do this and it's clear becuase I can go out looking for the best price on a game and not see it second hand anywhere which means it was either a rare game or noone has chosen to trade it in yet. Meanwhile a game like Heavy Rain which doesn't have much to offer once it has been completed has very little worth after one playthrough and gets traded in. This isn't even a question of how open the game is or how different each run through can be, it just has to be fun and engaging, I didn't know anyone who traded a Sonic The Hedgehog game in on Mega Drive (BECAUSE THEY WERE SO DAMN GOOD THEY WERE WORTH GOING BACK TO)

PS Steam SALES are cheap and yeah they're great but new games on Steam are the same price if not more expensive than some retail stores, example Skyrim is £34.99 on there right now meanwhile on play.com I can get it for £29.99 and I don't need to worry about destroying my download limit.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

You make a good point but I enjoy just being able to borrow a game from a friend sometimes. What if I wanted to borrow Halo 2 and go to a friends place then have a weekend long game marathon with 8 people.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Yeah, but now you have completely cut out the middle man leaving...

Let this guy explain it.

But once you have a complete market of single sale games then the price can be strongly dictated by the publishers. This means there would be no competition for lower prices and the result would be static prices on all games that only harm the consumer it would take a long time until the games dropped to a platinum range with a reasonable price on them if at all. having competition as you say "GO CAPITALISM" stimulates competition between different groups and forces them to accomodate for their audience whereas the method of their being no competition says "Buy the game or get lost kid" and I bet good money it would lead to an overall reduction in sales becuase consumers would feel like they were being bullied into the higher price and wouldn't feel like they can get any of that money back with a trade in.

AT THE CURRENT TIME Steam and Xbox Live are in competition with other methods of sale and CANT OFFER the trade in option therefore they lower their prices BECAUSE OF COMPETITION from these other places. If everyone had the same method of selling then there would be no need to compete with anyone and prices could be dictated and remain static (Just look at Star Craft 2)

You see by investing in a full price game right now a lot of people can comfort themselves with the idea that if it's a short game or they get bored of it pretty quick they have to choice to trade that game in to get some money off the next game.

An often missed point in this debate is DLC, not day 1 DLC or buy new only DLC. Just the solid actual DLC that's released after a few months. With games like Fallout 3 and New Vegas players want to keep holding onto their games for the promise of buying furhter expansions, something they can't do if they trade their game in. (and here's the fucking mindblower, even if the consumer originally bought a pre-owned copy of the game any DLC they buy is brand new and goes straight to the publishers/devs)

The best way to kill the second hand market is to make games that people don't want to trade in straight away. It's crazy but some games do this and it's clear becuase I can go out looking for the best price on a game and not see it second hand anywhere which means it was either a rare game or noone has chosen to trade it in yet. Meanwhile a game like Heavy Rain which doesn't have much to offer once it has been completed has very little worth after one playthrough and gets traded in. This isn't even a question of how open the game is or how different each run through can be, it just has to be fun and engaging, I didn't know anyone who traded a Sonic The Hedgehog game in on Mega Drive (BECAUSE THEY WERE SO DAMN GOOD THEY WERE WORTH GOING BACK TO)

PS Steam SALES are cheap and yeah they're great but new games on Steam are the same price if not more expensive than some retail stores, example Skyrim is £34.99 on there right now meanwhile on play.com I can get it for £29.99 and I don't need to worry about destroying my download limit.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Not to mention the single buy method ALWAYS leaves people not actually owning their games but being at the whims of an online system who can ban them at any time and also cut off access to their games. While I've never had this problem with Steam I've known others who have had close calls due to hackers and let me tell you a gamer who thinks he's going to lose £300 worth of games for some shit he never did can get into a pretty big rage about it. In effect the single buy system has you renting the game on a server even if that rent is forever it does not make what you bought belong to you and that has certain consequences meaning you can let someone else borrow the game and you can't play it on anothers system without using your own log in etc.

 

[nyysjan]

Only way to remove second hand game market while still retaining some level of ethics and customer friendliness is to make games good enough that people DON'T WANT TO LOOSE THEM!!!!!
(five exclamation marks, surely a sign of diseased mind if there ever was one)

 

[oplinger]

I stand by the opinion that they don't really deserve money from second hand sales since NO other companies get 2nd hand sales money...cars...

I really, really hate having to stress this sort of thing, but cars are a absolute shit example for used sales.

Why? Because cars are sold to dealers at up to 800% cost. They make back all the money they ever put into the car. Multiple times. the dealer will then mark the car up upwards of 100%, so they can bring the price down to a "good deal" to reel you in to buying it. Neither one of them gives a fuck about second hand sales because they don't have to. The manufacturer spent 2000 dollars to make it, and got 16 grand the dealer bought it for 16,000 dollars, and made 32 thousand dollars

..OT: There is no right way to kill second hand sales. You can't kill them. The only way to fight them though, is either try to make money off of them, or make a game people want to buy and not give away. Which in a perfect world, would be the best answer.

World's not perfect though, so making money off second hand sales is the best answer they have right now. Once the economy picks up and people have money to burn, it won't be so bad. Or when they stop being entitled pricks (not pointing fingers....we all know what I mean.)

 

[Soviet Steve]

Jason Pullara of LordKat.com mentioned a little while back that tactile things in the packaging or extra material would be a fairly nice way of doing it. Having an extra booklet or just some form of item in the packaging that you'd like to keep for one reason or another would make you less liable to just throw the game back at the store once you're done with it.

Having games that are good enough to hang on to would also be appreciated though.

 

[the_green_dragon]

snip

yeah ok Cars are a bad example but what about DVDs? And basically any other product ever. My Xbox, my TV, my magic cards. No-one other then me or the pawn shop will get money from those 2nd hand sales.

Also, the digital distrubition has killed some 2nd hand sales, you CAN'T trade in a game on your hard-drive.

I'm just saying if they want to stop second hand sales they should make the games cheaper. I think the next step developers will take will be to lock out the entire game until you put in a one use code, if that day comes, then they need to make the games 75% cheaper then they are now.

Also what is the deal with Xbox live trying to sell FULL price AAA games on xbox live? GTFO!

 

[Vault101]

fuck digital distribution....Ive been over this soo many times why its not nessicarly better

and jesus...second hand gamesis the ONE hting we have..you wan to leave it all int eh hands of publishers? they arnt some benevolent force you know

you dont find it sad that there will come a day when cant loan a game to a freind? or give it as a gift?

theres nothign wrong with second hand sales

 

[mitchell271]

Also, not everyone has internet. They're not people on the site, but there are many, many people that don't have internet at all.

 

[fraszoid]

My thought is if they are locking you out of multiplayer on used copies, why not also sell a copy without multiplayer brand new? Then the game shop has to compete with selling a used product with the same features they could get brand new. At EB in Canada used games are like 10 cheaper than brand new, so if the multiplayer stripped ones were 10 lower as well then used copies would be forced lower in response. If you can make the second hand market less lucrative, it'll be less of a problem. Also I'd finally have a reason to get MW3 and BF3.

 

[Digitaldreamer7]

I'd prefer people not kill second hand games I like cheap games.

 

[Zeh Don]

Do not argue in the affirmative for the prevention of used game Sales.

Your country, much like my own, grants us certain rights, and employs an entire force of armed individuals to protect those rights. Even rights as small, simple and often forgotten like the right of first sale.
Publishers are attempting to pull a bit of a trick here: they want you to think that Used Game Sales are the devil, and are killing the industry, and are something only dishonest people do. Selling your games is a protected right. It's not wrong. It's not evil. It's not killing the industry.

If EA Games sells 1,000,000 copies of the next Madden game, it makes 1,000,000 x [Profit Per Game Sold]. If I don't like the game, I sell it. EA Games doesn't lose a cent. They lose a disgruntled customer, and potentially gain a happy one in his/her place.
They attempt to argue that 2 people have "experienced" the game and so 2 people should pay for the game. In legal terms, 2 people did pay for the game, and both did so legally. One of them simply didn't pay EA Games directly - they paid someone else for the transfer of their rightful ownership. EA is unaffected by this transaction. This is why it's not only legal, but a right granted to you and protected by your government: there is nothing wrong with doing this.
Do not give away your rights so freely, however small they may seem.

The reason they wish to change this is because they've built an industry out of selling 6 hours games, and don't like that people can and will sell a game that can't be enjoyed more than once. Basically: they build disposable games, and only disposable games, and are now angry that people are disposing of them.

Heavy Rain is a terrific experience. But you can only play it once before it loses it's sheen. Same for LA Noir. Same for Fable III. Same for basically every game released today.
They want to be able to peddle you AU$120.00 games that last 4 hours that you can't get rid of, so they can sucker as people as humanly possible.

Let me put it this way: how many people are trading in their copies of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim?

 

[Toshiooh]

I'm sorry to point this out but car companies make money out the second hand business, since the cars need to be restored to working condition before going back on the market. The same goes for most things you can buy second hand such as computers and even furniture.

Nevertheless this artificial my pumping scheme for dlc access to elements of your own game seems absurd.

I think video game companies should consider product placement for extra revenue, and perhaps charge a premium offer without ads?

I don't know but suddenly I feel like I could get used to Drink Coca cola ads on billboards in gta, but not if it replaced nuka cola bottles in fallout...

 

[tehroc]

I'm sorry to point this out but car companies make money out the second hand business, since the cars need to be restored to working condition before going back on the market. The same goes for most things you can buy second hand such as computers and even furniture.

The car lot makes money not the manufacturers (well besides the cost of parts) when it comes to second-hand sales. Used cars do not get sent back to the manufacturer for repair, this is all done by the lot's mechanic.

 

[Sampler]

But game developers do make money from second hand games - no one sells games back to shops, they trade them in for store credit (as you get more) and then use said credit on new games.

Do you think MW3 would've made as much of 1st day sales record if it wasn't for the "You can have it for a fiver and a copy or Arkham City" promotions all the game retailers were doing?

Non expansion-DLC* and online pass are just a way for money types to bilk users out of more change - but people seem to be paying it so they'll continue.

* As in DLC that isn't like the old-fashioned expansion packs which adds more to the game (like Fallout 3's Mothership Zeta for example)

 

[Fasckira]

I very rarely buy second hand games unless they're really old and I cant find them new. The reason being is that I dont mind paying for all the initial content along with the knowledge that the disc is in perfect condition and not been used as a cup coaster previously.

If they really want to kill second hand sales then they could just switch to digital download only if they're that desperate - consumers get a marginally lower price due to lack of physical media plus instant product availability on release date while the publishers get the satisfaction of knowing that every sale is permanent and not going to be resold later down the line.

(five exclamation marks, surely a sign of diseased mind if there ever was one)

"Maskerade", Terry Pratchett - good quote, 5/5 to you sir.