Used games

[Generic4me]

Why does everyone seem to think that anybody in this situation isn't doing what they do purely because it's what's best for them?

Publishers load games with DLC and online passes because they make money. Gamestop pushes used games because they have better profit margins. Money. Used games buyers buy used games purely because IT'S CHEAPER. Money.

I'm not going to pretend that my buying used games doesn't hurt the Publishers and Developers, I just don't care. I've never met them, and they're pretty damn rich. Why should I?

Totalbiscuit and that guy from Kotaku seem to think that if we cut out used games, things will get better. No, they won't. Publishers and Developers are, I know, this argument is tired, but true, out to make money. They're not going to pass their "good fortune" of making all kinds of extra cash to us, because, again, they don't give a shit about us.

TL;DR, everybody cares about themselves. Don't pretend or fool yourself into thinking you don't.

 

[Cyfu]

They are undercutting new game sales, for a matter of $1-$2. So instead of selling 2 or 3 games, they are selling 1 game to 2-3 people for that $1-$2 the customer saves, the publisher loses $8-$10. That adds up over thousands of sales. It is not economically helpful to anyone. Game develop lose money on projects and things that would be beneficial to players. Games would be cheaper. If you clearly don't see this, then there is something wrong.

But The publishers will not lower their prizes.... Why should they when they can get away with selling games for 60dollars? Don't come here and say that the publishers are some good guys that are looking after us. They are out to make money, they will make the most money if they sell their games for 60 dollars so they will keep selling games for 60 dollars

 

[Cyfu]

Why has this become a thing on this forum, TB makes a video then somebody makes a thread, embeds the vid then says "waddya think?" ... It's like TB has just become the shit in gaming journalism. Just curious is all.

I will say here what I said on that video.

"Probably going to get a lot of hate for this but oh wells.

How is devs and publishers money troubles my problem? Thousands of stores across the world have closed down for whatever reason, should I have shopped there to try to keep them open? No 'cos how could I afford that, I'm no billionaire.

I can't afford to look out for other people, I'll work on my money problems and let everybody else deal with theres."

Is it a selfish stance, yes but it's not like the publishers are doing it out of the goodness of there hearts, they are in it to make money.

That's not to say I exclusively buy second hand, just looking at my pile of PS3 games ... half are brand new buys, new smell and all.

I don't really know... I posted this because I was genuinely curios on how people on the escapist felt about this. So I asked the question and added a video for both points of view.

 

[joshthor]

not all used games are bad, however, most are. here is what i mean. you walk into a game stop or your local video game store, you see the new game, say ... "assassins creed 3" new for 59.99. then you look to the right. its used right next to it for 56.99!!! you can save 3 bucks!! thats scumbag level sales right there. im all for bargin bins and good discounts but seriously, if your local retailer gives you < $5 off for a used game, just buy a new copy and support the industry.

Used games have a variety of potential problems these days with online codes, dlc, and even just scratched media. so if you are so cheap you cant break out an extra $3-5 for a 60 dollar game you shouldnt be playing video games - you should be finding a job.

that being said, older games are completely fine. its all about percentage difference. if you can get an older game (and know there are no online codes and stuff) for like 10 bucks when the game is normally $15-20 go for it. those are significant savings % wise.

edit: oh, and speaking as someone who works for one of these game stores, dont think we are bringing you savings. we buy the newer games for around 20 bucks and flip em for 50-60, older ones we will give less than 5 bucks for and flip em for 20. there is no better racket than the used market.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

I would not have bought a game system or acouple indie games off Live if it were not for used games.

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

Although used games make up a rather small proportion of my collection, I will say that it's allocated me a bit more money to spend on the games that I actually want to buy and own new, or on sale. Without them, I'm sure my spending and consideration would have to be cut down. And not even because I can't afford them, I can afford them just fine, but it's a bit of a budget allocation towards 'entertainment' which is really the hardest to justify.

One reason I am against culling used games however is the methods which will be used to enforce it. If your system dies, you will have to do a bit of migration in order to play on another system. Which is a small hassle really, but if something were to happen to your profile, you'd be in a bit of a mess...all those games useless until it gets sorted out. Another thing is lending games to friends, I mean you could do it like the kindle method of a trial period of 2 weeks or whatever, but honestly the fact that you can't lend a game to a friend would suck BIG time, as this is how I got into almost every franchise I play nowadays - trading between my brother, friends, his friends etc.

And I am so sick of the used car argument. Because yes, a car deteriorates over time. But hardly any other form of "media" does, unless you are talking about VHS and cassette tapes. We can lend DVDs, music, and games to each other now, there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to in the future, it's not going to "cut into your sales" if someone wants to try it, but aren't going to unless they can try it first, you dolts. Well maybe they would, but not that many at $60-$100 a pop (in Australia). Even on "sale"

 

[wulf3n]

And I am so sick of the used car argument. Because yes, a car deteriorates over time.

I don't get why people think the "deterioration" response is valid.

The Idea behind the used car comparison is that they're both physical items wholly owned by the person that purchased them, which entitles the owner to resell if they wish.

Sure there are differences between a game and a car, but those differences are irrelevant with regards to the issue being discussed.

 

[Brotha Desmond]

I think that they both make valid points, but it feels like they are just demonizing the opposite parties.
Jim blames the publishers while Total biscuit blames the game companies.
My thoughts are I don't think that used sales damage publishers that much, but I'm willing to have a middle ground. Five dollar pass for used games.

 

[Snotnarok]

Used games are bad for pubs, we get that but then instead of punishing their customers by offering less, why don't they lower the price and give sales?
Yes shipping, packaging is different than Steam but games launch at $60 bucks, then you wait for a price drop and if it's popular? That doesn't happen, it just sells out and that's it...except there's the used copy, right there. For a better price.
And that used copy? Hell if I want to sell my physical copy of a game, I should be able to. Take the online out of it for used buyers fine because whatever that's a serial number sorta deal anyway (used to that with PC) but it's crazy to be told you can't sell something you own and bought.

Do something that offers customers a better deal, or give them reasons to keep coming back instead of hammering out a new game every freaking year. Valve launched TF2 and that's 6 years old now and it's still updated and still gets money, okay granted you can't sell TF2 but imagine if the console versions were allowed to update freely and they gave portions of the sales to MS and sony?
That would be just money being flung all around for a old ass game but instead it's blocked by strange policies and basically greed. CoD a new one comes out every year, same engine,same idea every time and it's 60 dollars for the game and then 60 dollars in map packs total same cycle every year.Why not just do new map packs since no one even bothers with the freaking single player, and if they want to keep that going expect used sales of that! When sales get stale, make a new game...as in a new engine ...that isn't the doom 3 engine modified from how many years ago?

 

[Souplex]

They are a good thing that I rarely use.

 

[FoolKiller]

Ea do well because EA make some of the best selling games on the market (Activision do as well but only the one game a year)

You do realize that the biggest money maker for Activision isn't actually Call of Duty, right?

And I love used games not because I don't want to support the game makers but because a lot of times I can't find a new copy. I have a huge backlog in one case and only got a PS3 a year ago. I can't find a lot of the games for it unless they're used.

 

[emeraldrafael]

I rather like used games. They're cheap ways to play games that otherwise would be too expensive to enjoy at full price when you're on a budget. I agree more with Jim than I do TB but then again i have friends who work in gamestop too and it bugs me when someone says gamestop is evil just cause they want to make money.

 

[Extra-Ordinary]

Almost every other game I own was bought used so, yeah, I like them

 

[Windcaler]

I dont think used games are a problem but I think companies solely based around the sale of used games are a problem. Im very much of the belief that when you buy a game you own all of it. You own the plastic and metal in a disk and you own the files contained within. That is your property and you have a right to do whatever you want with it. You can sell it, you can mod it, you can destroy it if you like. Its yours.

The problem comes when used games businesses get involved and actively push people to buy used instead of buying new. Basicly they are specialized pawn shops without the option to even pawn something. I dont think any of this would be a big issue if you could just return a game. You can get an exchange, generally for the same product, but you cant return one and you havnt been able to for years.

Now Im mostly a PC gamer and we havnt had the capability to return or sell games en mass for years but that in itself has diluted the idea of ownership. Instead we have DRM riddled digital distribution systems like STEAM, Origin, and Desura. Yes we get great sales with steam but I dont really like steam for a variety of reasons. We dont get such massive sales on other DD services, you get some but not nearly as many or as deep. Then theres the fact that you just cant get some games except on 1 and only 1 DD service. You can only get EA games off of origin, I can only get Valve games off of STEAM, last I checked I could only buy Bethesda games on STEAM, and theres no physical copies anymore. My brother went and bought a retail copy of Xcom for me last christmas (I loved the thoguht but its just an awful game when I compare it to the 1993 one) and it required steam. It didnt say anywhere on the box that I had to have steam to use it either. This just annoys me to no end and there really should be some kind of law against that kind of thing

Dont get me wrong here, Im not saying DD services are innately bad but they do have several shortcomings. If people want to accept those shortcomings, ok its their money and I have no right to tell them how to spend it. However, where are the physical copies for me? Maybe I dont want to sit there while my DSL connection downloads a 6 gb game for a couple of hours (as opposed to the 10-15 mins it takes to install Borderlands off the disk). Maybe I dont want to deal with a DD service because I dont agree with their business decisions. Maybe I think that a company is on a slow spiral toward bankruptcy and I dont want to be locked into a system where I cant get my games off of when it shuts down. At the end of the day I can take my physical copy of Morrowind or Dragon Age Origins and if I take care of it it'll always serve me but I cant control what goes on with a companies servers. For any reason, actually for no reason, Steam could close down my account and take away the ability to play games I purchased from them and thats a problem. If one day STEAM does something really really really wrong and I never want to do business with them again, Im stuck. I'll loose thousands of dollars worth of merchandise that Im supposed to own but dont really

One of the most frustrating parts about all this is my friends and I loan/borrow games a lot but I cant do that with my PC. If a friend comes over from a long day of work and we have dinner together when I see hes tired and needs to unwind I cant give him a disk and say "here man, try this out".

For all its faults, I still think PC gaming is superior in the sense that we have cheaper games, have a wider variety of games, and can customize our hardware to our own needs. However I would be a fool if I didnt speak out against the faults of the businesses that have locked down the PCs gaming market. PC used to be an open gaming platform, not so much since the rise of digital distribution where a few companies rule over us with their DRM disguised DD services.

At the end of the day we all have our different opinions and theyre all valid as long as theyre based on factual information. We dont have to like or agree with other peoples opinions. My opinion is used games have a place in this market and they always will. However its not used games thats the problem, its these pawn shops in disguise

 

[AD-Stu]

Another aspect that I don't think has been fully accounted for is the damage that getting rid of used games could do to new game sales - as in there's a subset (possibly a large subset) of people who buy games new specifically because they know they have the option to sell it back to the retailer a week later.

My brother is a console gamer, for example, and I know it's pretty common for him to buy a game new and then if it's not something he's likely to play again he'll trade it back in. If the option to trade back in didn't exist, there's a large number of games he either wouldn't buy at all, or would at least wait until the retail price came way down. Whether that would be made up for by titles that he'd be forced to buy new because second hand options didn't exist any more I don't know...

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

And I am so sick of the used car argument. Because yes, a car deteriorates over time.

I don't get why people think the "deterioration" response is valid.

The Idea behind the used car comparison is that they're both physical items wholly owned by the person that purchased them, which entitles the owner to resell if they wish.

Sure there are differences between a game and a car, but those differences are irrelevant with regards to the issue being discussed.

I agree wholeheartedly. But they don't want you to feel that you own what you pay for, they want full control over it. So you only get to use what a company allows you to, such as the words that come about like 'license', 'pass', I may have phrased a bit wrong because I was in a bit of a rush, but the reason I'm sick of the 'used car' argument is also because things that deteriorate we have been lending and selling since a long time ago. And also the same with things that don't. That's just the argument I used when people pull the stupid "it's not like a used car" card.