Used Games Policy

[TG MLPDashie]

If anyone wants to know the legitimate reason behind why used games policies are going to be in place, go watch TotalBiscuit's "Used Games" show.

It's a real problem in the games industry, because companies like Gamestop don't pay them for used game sales. It's pure profit. The developers make nothing. Not only that, but they go out of their way and force heavy handed business measures to make sure people buy ONLY used games. I remember going to buy a new game, and they told me I could not only get it cheaper, but get even more points on my rewards card by going used. I was at the register with the new game! And what are you saving - 5 bucks, tops? You saving 5 bucks just cost the developer about 30. Now imagine how many used game sales there are for every release.

You can use analogies like "oh but DVDs, oh but cars", but they all flop. Movies have about 5 selling points - theatres, DVD, Pay per view/On demand, TV deals, and rental stores. And you can't compare a luxury $60 game with an essential $20,000 car. Games are an inherently different beast.

The PC gaming crowd has gotten this. They understand how it needs to work. No more used games leads to a MUCH better market. We get things like massive Steam sales because the developers can actually afford to do it now! We get super cheap games because devs are pretty much assured they'll get paid for every copy!

But even Steam has problems because of companies like GameStop. Steam and developers want to sell even cheaper - which will help sell even more and discourage piracy and it's "I can't afford it" argument. However, game companies have been in a position of bullying publishers for years. Because no one can argue with the only person selling their product! Because of this reliance, they force publishers and developers to have exclusive pre order or release extra content they otherwise wouldn't include. They've threatened to take games off the rack if they lowered the Steam price below the Gamestop price.

 

[UnnDunn]

I wish people would understand this. The real enemy is not consumers, it's GameStop.

 

[madwarper]

Oh, it's this rubbish... Again. /sigh

You, and TB, should go watch the Jimquisition.

Spoiler

Stop trying to make GameStop out to be the sole boogeyman, when the more serious problem lies in the greed of publishers and their incompetence in not being able to budget a game so it'll make a profit.

 

[TehCookie]

What is up with gamers being anti-consumer? They enjoy not having any ownership over their games and complain when there are ways to get it cheaper. I get the hate for Gamestop, but they aren't the only used game dealer.

 

[TG MLPDashie]

Oh, it's this rubbish... Again. /sigh

You, and TB, should go watch the Jimquisition.

Spoiler

Stop trying to make GameStop out to be the sole boogeyman, when the more serious problem lies in the greed of publishers and their incompetence in not being able to budget a game so it'll make a profit.

Hey, I agree that the publishers are greedy twits who spend way to much on their budget when making a new title but it doesn't make any of my points any less valid. Not everything is black and white mate, you have to learn that.

 

[Comocat]

Game companies are never going to convince me that I'm not buying their product. They can try and handwave all they want, but I'm never going to accept that after paying $60 dollars for a game, I'm only borrowing it from them. Rather than trying to convince consumers that (are literally allowed to own everything else they buy) somehow video games inhabit a magic bubble, the industry should consider how they monetize their product.

I've bought more new games from GameStop than anywhere else, and its the only place I can think of where I can spend time looking at lots of games. Head into any bigbox store and you maybe have a small kiosk for a console.

My other counter argument is, just like the last dozen threads, just because 10 million copies of a game are in circulation, doesnt mean you could have sold 10 million copies. Over the last few years of gaming, enough new releases have come out that I want to play, but that comes out to thousands of dollars in video games. I dont have thousands of dollars to spend on games, and if I had that kind of money I'd probably have a job where I didnt have time to play that many games. Right now I maybe buy 3 or 4 new games and supplement with a handful of used games. Kill used games and suddenly I'm only buying 5 or 6 new games a year- or maybe none because why have a console if you only have a couple games.

 

[Schadrach]

It's a real problem in the games industry, because companies like Gamestop don't pay them for used game sales. It's pure profit. The developers make nothing.

Like every secondhand sale of every product ever. You might as well declare that pawn shops are the scum of the earth (for reasons other than occasionally being used to fence stolen goods) because the original manufacturer doesn't make a dime off of any product they sell. How dare you buy a secondhand console, MS/Sony/Nintendo doesn't get a dime from that sale. How dare you buy a secondhand TV, the manufacturer doesn't get a cut of that either. Ever heard of the right of first sale? Restricting that, in a way that doesn't apply to anything else, and demanding that the manufacturer gets a cut at every resale is a road that leads to madness.

Not only that, but they go out of their way and force heavy handed business measures to make sure people buy ONLY used games. I remember going to buy a new game, and they told me I could not only get it cheaper, but get even more points on my rewards card by going used. I was at the register with the new game! And what are you saving - 5 bucks, tops? You saving 5 bucks just cost the developer about 30. Now imagine how many used game sales there are for every release.

Really? "If you want to buy this, I've got a slightly cheaper used copy available, and we give more frequent customer points for used copies since they're better for our margin. Are you interested?" isn't exactly what I'd call heavy handed. Also, you get an additional 10% if you have said frequent customer card when buying used, so it's usually closer to $10 cheaper. I'm surprised that you haven't compared their "buy 2 used get one free" sales to genocide at this point.

You can use analogies like "oh but DVDs, oh but cars", but they all flop. Movies have about 5 selling points - theatres, DVD, Pay per view/On demand, TV deals, and rental stores. And you can't compare a luxury $60 game with an essential $20,000 car. Games are an inherently different beast.

You can use "oh but any other non-consumable product ever" because of the first-sale doctrine (which essentially says that once you've been sold something, it's yours and the copyright or trademark holder doesn't get to have a say or demand a cut if you try to resell it).

The PC gaming crowd has gotten this. They understand how it needs to work. No more used games leads to a MUCH better market. We get things like massive Steam sales because the developers can actually afford to do it now! We get super cheap games because devs are pretty much assured they'll get paid for every copy!

By that kind of logic, we'd see much cheaper release prices for PC games, because they wouldn't need to make up for much of the later sales being eaten up by evil used sales that are robbing them blind. Instead, we see massive Steam sales because they realize a well timed sale can get people who were on the fence to pick it up, and a discounted sale is better than no sale.

But even Steam has problems because of companies like GameStop. Steam and developers want to sell even cheaper - which will help sell even more and discourage piracy and it's "I can't afford it" argument. However, game companies have been in a position of bullying publishers for years. Because no one can argue with the only person selling their product! Because of this reliance, they force publishers and developers to have exclusive pre order or release extra content they otherwise wouldn't include. They've threatened to take games off the rack if they lowered the Steam price below the Gamestop price.

For PC games, do you think this would matter much? The only people who buy PC games at retail are the ones afraid of the big bad digital distribution companies and their evil DRMs. Last time I bought a PC game retail was because it didn't *have* a Steam version (and the time before that I bought the PS3 version because it included the PC version as a bonus).

It's also worth noting that Gamestop isn't "the only person selling their product" it's just the only specialty store centered around their product. You can grab any AAA console title at Wal*Mart, Target, K-Mart, Sears, etc without any difficulty. Amazon too if we can count online sellers.

 

[Genocidicles]

I think it's hilarious how people assume that without used games, new games will become cheaper.

Why would they? They know they can charge $60/£40 for games, so what incentive do they to lower the prices?

Plus, TB mentioned GAME in his video, all of his knowledge coming from working in said shop apparently. According to him they were just rolling in money because of used game sales, which is bullshit. They filed for bankruptcy last year, so I doubt they're making that much money.

 

[Hazy992]

Well maybe if publishers paid GameStop more than 2 bucks for a $60 game they wouldn't have to push used games so much. Are they too aggressive with it? Absolutely, but it's a two way street here and once again the consumer is the one caught in the middle.