56% of American Gamers Don't Buy Games

[Skeleon]

Well, and now publishers have a choice: Make games cheaper or produce more and more elaborate measures to make legitimate gaming a hell while also increasing prices, while pirates work to undo it all.

I for one basically only buy budget titles or pre-owned games these days. I'm a student. I have to pay for rent. I can't afford to throw my money out like that, so I'd rather wait a little while until I buy my games. More importantly, however, I really despise these online registration issues being forced on us and take great care not to buy games that feature them. Made a mistake once or twice, though.

 

[Garethp]

I don't feel any guilt for borrowing games(mind you, I borrow from a friend for PS2 and Game Cube) but honestly.

60$ for PS3

40$ for 3DS

Come on, there's no way I'm gonna spend that much on those. I don't have 60$ to constantly throw away on a video game that probably won't last me a week. Nothing like throwing away 60$

Then there's 3DS games. 40$ for remakes and ports and the umpteenth Mario games. Hell no. The 3DS is a portable GameCube with ass 3D. I've only gotten Zelda OoT and Street Fighter 4. I have no intention of paying 40$ for games that either look unappealing or sale for 10$ on eBay on older consoles. Even if you added some graphical improvements and 3D~

Damn, Nintendo. Freakin' lower the price of your games. 20$ would be perfect. I could spend 40$ much easier if I was getting two games. 40$ is just rediculous.

Read my post two down from yours. Paying that little for games is a goddamn good price in Australia

What's your point? In a warzone, I'm pretty sure you'd rather have one leg blown off then the other guy who lost both, but I'm sure you probably wouldn't suck it up and never show pain or mention it, because you know others are in worse condition.

This is such B.S. logic. Just because you pay more doesn't mean jack. How much do you have to spend? What if someone here only pays 60$, but that's all they get if they save up for 2 months, huh? Then what? They can't complain about pricing because oh no, someone pays more somewhere else? No, screw that.

I'm tired of this arguement. Just because you pay more doesn't make it any better for us. We aren't fucking cash cows who can dole out 60$ a game easy as that. Yeah, sure, 100$ a game is a *****. But when did that EVER make 60$ cheap as air? Hell, don't Australian's get payed more then American's? Perhaps you can work out a way where you get payed less and they lower the price of games. Sound good?

I don't have money to blow constantly on 60$ games. A 100$ price tag doesn't mean jack to me, because I can't even justify it at 60$

You know, just because you're getting screwed over doesn't make it better for the rest of us.

I refuse to accept that damn logic. What if there's a place that costs more for games then Australia? What if they pay double what you pay? Will you then never complain about a 130$ game as long as someone else has to pay 200$?

I get paid $30K a year. After paying rent and bills, that's not exactly much.

As towards your argument, people in here are raging over $60 a game, when they should be happy because It's just $60 dollars for a new game. For fucks sake. You guys aren't getting ripped off, you guys have it fucking great. Your anology isn't correct, it's more like having a nice house, good food, clean water, education, fast internet, then looking at what people live like in India and complaining that you don't have the money to buy every single game as it's new.

It's not a matter of it's being bad, you guys have good prices. Fucking great prices. And you complain they aren't good enough?

 

[Lord Kloo]

Even if buying used games or swapping games between your friends does screw over developers.. why the f**k am I meant to care that they chose a really rubbish business model.. the industry of Tescos or Wall-mart doesn't suffer because many people use a different store to them..

Developers and whoever gets affected by used games or swapping them needs to find a way around their problem because it is their problem not the customers..

And they should not do this on the steam model of selling you a game once, for one computer.. for the rest of time.. seriously it sucks not being able to trade in Black Ops..

 

[Kevlar Eater]

Get rid of physical distribution and you will lower game prices. You will give up your ability to resell, but you will get better and cheaper games.

This I will never believe. The same thing applies to every other industry; every publisher, corporation, etc. is always looking for ways to cut costs while either keeping the same market price for their products, and/or occasionally raise prices to see what they can get away with. With video games, the price will likely rise (with EA or Activision leading the way with $65+ games with approximately half the content games currently have while selling the rest as downloadable or disk-locked content).

 

[Iori Branford]

Even if buying used games or swapping games between your friends does screw over developers.. why the f**k am I meant to care that they chose a really rubbish business model.. the industry of Tescos or Wall-mart doesn't suffer because many people use a different store to them..

Finally we're moving the discussion forward, thank you. I've been meaning to ask something similar -- assuming so-called "losses" due to reselling and trading (protip, "not getting" does not equal "losing", outside of an explicit contract which does not exist between consumers and industry) how would they justify mugging retailers, or laying pay traps and kill switches for customers?

Developers and whoever gets affected by used games or swapping them needs to find a way around their problem because it is their problem not the customers..

You said it, although they have found a way; let's amend that to "a fair way". Here's one that's not said enough: cut the fucking budget. As the Wii shows, a majority of users will rather have simple graphics, toon physics, and 2.1 stereo sound than pay current "hardcore" game prices, as long as the talent behind the game can make it look and feel nonetheless good.

And they should not do this on the steam model of selling you a game once, for one computer.. for the rest of time.. seriously it sucks not being able to trade in Black Ops..

It does, and there is always the risk of losing your games on the digital store's whim. But Steam gives you so much convenience in return and remained steady for so long that its users don't worry much at all. Imagine that, good service wins consumer trust.

 

[Sylveria]

I see there's no distinction between "new" used games and "old" used games which is something very important to look at. There's a lot of stuff that was made several years ago that people at the time couldn't or didn't buy new. I know probably around 80% of my game budget is spent on used games purely because I buy a lot of PS1-2-P games that I couldn't get new now even if I wanted to, or, if I did, I'd be 150%+ of it's actual retail value. Not to mention, the vast majority of what comes out for modern gen consoles is absolute garbage. I had more fun playing PS2 game than ANYTHING I've gotten for my PS3 in the past year. Heck, I had more fun on Cthulhu Saves the World, an indie game I got for less than $2, than any $60 AAA title.

And again, making games worth keeping or rewarding the people who buy new rather than trying to screw the used buyers (and in doing so, also screwing the people who buy new.. that you should really be endearing yourself to) would be the most effective method. Stop pumping out 8hr one-shotters. People don't want to drop $60 on a new game when they know in a week they'll be able to buy it used for $50 or less cause people will buy it, beat it in a few days, then dump it since there's no reason not to. Work to improve the quality of the actual game release instead of making up throw-away DLC or other schemes to make up for the used sales.

 

[Vault101]

If they fade from public then they should fade from the PC market as well. To bring marketing is none issue again.
Also I am calling bullshit because if there were no long term market, then used market wouldn't exists. To say that it only exists on PC is bullshit. Would you please tell me why there should be a long term PC market, but not a long term on console market. Its often the same customer.

The main thing is the long term market is occupied by the second hand sales. The publisher cant compete because they have much greater costs when reproducing and distributing product .

last thing. That publishers arn't willing to change their ways has no effect on whether or not its good for us/them to change to full digital. I stand by my original statement of going full digital would make a steam like service the norm on any platform and lower prices of games in general.

They don't fade from the PC because of the likes of Steam and GoG promoting them through their constant daily/weekly/holiday/summer sales. Not to mention storing and distributing on the PC is insanely cheaper than manufacturing disks.

And yet the digital versions still cost just as much as the physical versions. Even though the digital one is much cheaper to maintain and carries a much larger profit. Look, I'm not saying that going digital is inherently bad, but I'm saying that with how they've already demonstrated with the general prices of digital content on the PC, prices won't go down.

Or maybe they will. I don't know. The PC is a very different market compared to consoles. Maybe things will be different. But that requires me to trust the publishers to do the right thing.

Fat chance of that happening.

If its Steam and GoG doing the marketing then for making the games long term, then an equal Digital service on console would do the same. Again, making marketing a none issue.

Also the reason the digital copies cost the same as the physical is because the price is set by the physical, and the publisher are forced by the distributors to keep an even playing field or else they wont carry their games. When the initial sales are over Steam is often allowed to lower the price by the publisher because the distributors weight will be a lot less for long term sales (there is none). Any game without a physical product has always been a lot cheaper than one with. That is a fact. A digital sale gets a much higher profit than a physical. You should be getting them for less, but because that physical exists you cant.

But as you have seen, there have been some attempts at making pure digital version of games and experimentation on price on the PC market. Only thing holding it back is the old ways.

Get rid of physical distribution and you will lower game prices. You will give up your ability to resell, but you will get better and cheaper games.

1. crappy internet..alot of people have it, alot of people dont want to wait days to download a game

2. not actually having much controll over somthing you purchased

3. if you take care of your physical copies there less chance for problems, with downloads it can be pure luck...every fucking time Ive tries to download beyond good and evil on PSN its corrupted and i have no Idea why...if somthing downloads too slowly its corruptes (so goes my theory)

digital distribution may be the way of the future (though physical copies may hang around...plus you never know, thats just pure speculation on anyones part) but untill the world fixes its internet issues I dont see it being the best option for everyone

my point is for me (and I imagine other people physical copies are the better way to get their games

plus I dont want my choices as a consumer limited, PLUS fuck it, I wont stop buying used games untill it becomes illigal.. (that said I spend plently on new games)

 

[Asuka Soryu]

I don't feel any guilt for borrowing games(mind you, I borrow from a friend for PS2 and Game Cube) but honestly.

60$ for PS3

40$ for 3DS

Come on, there's no way I'm gonna spend that much on those. I don't have 60$ to constantly throw away on a video game that probably won't last me a week. Nothing like throwing away 60$

Then there's 3DS games. 40$ for remakes and ports and the umpteenth Mario games. Hell no. The 3DS is a portable GameCube with ass 3D. I've only gotten Zelda OoT and Street Fighter 4. I have no intention of paying 40$ for games that either look unappealing or sale for 10$ on eBay on older consoles. Even if you added some graphical improvements and 3D~

Damn, Nintendo. Freakin' lower the price of your games. 20$ would be perfect. I could spend 40$ much easier if I was getting two games. 40$ is just rediculous.

Read my post two down from yours. Paying that little for games is a goddamn good price in Australia

What's your point? In a warzone, I'm pretty sure you'd rather have one leg blown off then the other guy who lost both, but I'm sure you probably wouldn't suck it up and never show pain or mention it, because you know others are in worse condition.

This is such B.S. logic. Just because you pay more doesn't mean jack. How much do you have to spend? What if someone here only pays 60$, but that's all they get if they save up for 2 months, huh? Then what? They can't complain about pricing because oh no, someone pays more somewhere else? No, screw that.

I'm tired of this arguement. Just because you pay more doesn't make it any better for us. We aren't fucking cash cows who can dole out 60$ a game easy as that. Yeah, sure, 100$ a game is a *****. But when did that EVER make 60$ cheap as air? Hell, don't Australian's get payed more then American's? Perhaps you can work out a way where you get payed less and they lower the price of games. Sound good?

I don't have money to blow constantly on 60$ games. A 100$ price tag doesn't mean jack to me, because I can't even justify it at 60$

You know, just because you're getting screwed over doesn't make it better for the rest of us.

I refuse to accept that damn logic. What if there's a place that costs more for games then Australia? What if they pay double what you pay? Will you then never complain about a 130$ game as long as someone else has to pay 200$?

I get paid $30K a year. After paying rent and bills, that's not exactly much.

As towards your argument, people in here are raging over $60 a game, when they should be happy because It's just $60 dollars for a new game. For fucks sake. You guys aren't getting ripped off, you guys have it fucking great. Your anology isn't correct, it's more like having a nice house, good food, clean water, education, fast internet, then looking at what people live like in India and complaining that you don't have the money to buy every single game as it's new.

It's not a matter of it's being bad, you guys have good prices. Fucking great prices. And you complain they aren't good enough?

xD 30,000? Then back down baby, I average 10,800$ a year.

I have after all my expenses, 400$ for luxury and grocceries a month. :3

So, now that we've crushed your 'I'm poor, wah" arguement, let's begin.



Your analogies even worse. I mean, really? That's how you see it? Then you're just a brat. You see someone has a little better and you act like if them not enjoying expensive things is is sick, wrong and proof they are the devil because you pay a bit more? Gawd.

And frak no, 60$ isn't a good price. Say there's an item for 30$, I charge 60$ for it. That's a good deal though, because the other guy charges 100$ for it? No. It makes both prices expensive and a rip off.

Ugh, and I'm really really sick of Australian's like you bitching about their prices and acting like they're some person dieing on the streets looking at a rich man complaining he didn't get 10000$ for something.

You know, I get it, people ***** about 60$ and you guys have to pay 100$ But that doesn't give you the right to act like you're the only ones who deserve to complain.

I figure you should be happy to play a new gen game, my friend can't even afford a game console where he lives.

 

[pirateninj4]

Fuck their profits...they need to start making games that are actually good and not just re hashes of the same old shit.

People will buy new if it's genuinely good. As evidenced by the last 20 years of game sales.

 

[BakedZnake]

I never grasped the concept of NEW GAME - I MUST HAVE NOW applied to many AAA games each year. You see it in many comments, and maybe acted yourself on the lines of for example "I'm going to get Battlefield 3, modern warfare 3, skyrim, saints row 3, dark souls etc etc etc at launch, but I am going to poor ", I mean can you really play through all those games before next years release line of more AAA games?

I tend buy couple games at launch which occupy me for for quite a long peroid, then get the games I wanted next couple months down the line new but at a much reduced price, no hassle with online passes, no hassle with launch day bugs and have time to play

 

[Vault101]

If they fade from public then they should fade from the PC market as well. To bring marketing is none issue again.
Also I am calling bullshit because if there were no long term market, then used market wouldn't exists. To say that it only exists on PC is bullshit. Would you please tell me why there should be a long term PC market, but not a long term on console market. Its often the same customer.

The main thing is the long term market is occupied by the second hand sales. The publisher cant compete because they have much greater costs when reproducing and distributing product .

last thing. That publishers arn't willing to change their ways has no effect on whether or not its good for us/them to change to full digital. I stand by my original statement of going full digital would make a steam like service the norm on any platform and lower prices of games in general.

They don't fade from the PC because of the likes of Steam and GoG promoting them through their constant daily/weekly/holiday/summer sales. Not to mention storing and distributing on the PC is insanely cheaper than manufacturing disks.

And yet the digital versions still cost just as much as the physical versions. Even though the digital one is much cheaper to maintain and carries a much larger profit. Look, I'm not saying that going digital is inherently bad, but I'm saying that with how they've already demonstrated with the general prices of digital content on the PC, prices won't go down.

Or maybe they will. I don't know. The PC is a very different market compared to consoles. Maybe things will be different. But that requires me to trust the publishers to do the right thing.

Fat chance of that happening.

If its Steam and GoG doing the marketing then for making the games long term, then an equal Digital service on console would do the same. Again, making marketing a none issue.

Also the reason the digital copies cost the same as the physical is because the price is set by the physical, and the publisher are forced by the distributors to keep an even playing field or else they wont carry their games. When the initial sales are over Steam is often allowed to lower the price by the publisher because the distributors weight will be a lot less for long term sales (there is none). Any game without a physical product has always been a lot cheaper than one with. That is a fact. A digital sale gets a much higher profit than a physical. You should be getting them for less, but because that physical exists you cant.

But as you have seen, there have been some attempts at making pure digital version of games and experimentation on price on the PC market. Only thing holding it back is the old ways.

Get rid of physical distribution and you will lower game prices. You will give up your ability to resell, but you will get better and cheaper games.

1. crappy internet..alot of people have it, alot of people dont want to wait days to download a game

2. not actually having much controll over somthing you purchased

3. if you take care of your physical copies there less chance for problems, with downloads it can be pure luck...every fucking time Ive tries to download beyond good and evil on PSN its corrupted and i have no Idea why...if somthing downloads too slowly its corruptes (so goes my theory)

digital distribution may be the way of the future (though physical copies may hang around...plus you never know, thats just pure speculation on anyones part) but untill the world fixes its internet issues I dont see it being the best option for everyone

my point is for me (and I imagine other people physical copies are the better way to get their games

plus I dont want my choices as a consumer limited, PLUS fuck it, I wont stop buying used games untill it becomes illigal.. (that said I spend plently on new games)

I am mainly just promoting it because it will make the games cheaper and put the profits made into the hands of those whos job it is to make more games.

To me digital distribution is like the car taking over for the horse. We may not have the roads to handle the cars yet everywhere, but we are getting there.

The thing is so many here are bloody greedy. Its all about the developers/publishers should take less of a cut so we can get a physical product cheaper rather than us giving up the physical product so we can get it cheaper. We want our cake and eat it to. I am willing to give up the physical copies for a 30% price reduction (estimate). I can only speak for myself thou. I am well aware that even if there is perfect set up with no back draws from internet or file corruptions there will still be customers who insist on having a physical product or not buy at all.

On a note thou. Your point 3 you really shouldn't use. Its anecdotal evidence. It carries as much weight as me saying "my CDs were scratched so Physical has more problems than digital". Just saying. Its a none argument.

As a final thought. I dont mind anyone buying used. I dont want to leave the impression I am a crusader against used games. I am a crusader for digital distribution. The publisher set up the system and people are using it to the best of their ability to get the best deal. Nothing wrong with that. Now I do have a problem with people whining when the publishers want to change the system. Its their right to do so. Its their product. People will start self entitled whines about what they deserve and that the publisher are being greedy while they were trying to get as many games as possible for the money rather than the publishers getting as much money for the games as possible.

Anyway I have rambled on long enough. My point was I think we will be better served with full digital. Better games cheaper.

Im still not convinced, I dont like the Idea of having less control over what I buy (PC aside, with the currnt systm, I buy a game, its mine for as long as i can keep the hardware running its not upto a server or an online service..) plus I dont see the price going down "that" significantly

I dont buy the physical copy because its cheaper (in fact i spent alot more on new than i do used) and I dont complain about having to be more because Im in Aus, I can afford it

bottom line is...its not my problem, I am a consumer and I will take what ever legal options and choice are availible to me as is my right...to you that may seem entitled but I dont see why gaming has to be "special" compared to other industrys

its sad that I cant plays games with somone in the same room as much..and its even more sad the Idea that I cant lend a freind a copy of a game...could you imagine if they took away the ability to do that with other products? DVD's. toys....

you have probably already seen it but the jimquisitions video on the topic has some good points

 

[Something Amyss]

Who said I was trying to cop out? Second of all, how can it be "silly" and "disingenuous"? I tried supporting my argument with an example and logical reasoning. Your "I'm holier than thou" attitude isn't really bringing a good atmosphere to this so called "internet argument".

Hey, if you're not going to be serious, That's fine.

Just don't expect me to be. Claiming "holier than thou" is as silly as claiming the "tone" of my toneless internet post was different.

Sorry, but if you really want the last word, I'll let you have it.

 

[The_Fezz]

I borrowed RAGE, a couple of weeks ago from a friend, less borrowed, more he just left it here and I kept it.
I was kinda disappointed by the lack of the sewer sections since he'd already used the promotion code but in fairness I finished it in two days in the barest possible sense so I don't know why I'm complaining about having more side missions on top of the ones I hadn't bothered to do already.

I lent him Dead Rising 2 in return; he hasn't actually played it yet.

I think what I'm trying to say here is that I have nothing against borrowing games, the effects aren't nearly as extreme as piracy and if you happen to be as OCD as me, the regret of not having the DLC will always guilt trip you.

 

[stewox]

Why i don't buy as much games:
I don't play console games
I don't play crappy ports
I don't pay for crappy DLC
I don't have time to play more than 3-4 games per year.

MW3 = Call of Duty 4 Map Pack 3

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Damn, everyone here seems to be on piracy or used games, and I thought the big topic would be:

"Australia - a course in how to lose millions in tax revenue by banning parts of the biggest entertainment industry in the world because your government thinks it knows better than everyone else"

I don't know the figures for Aus, but in the UK, throwing some mild figures out, that I've entirely pulled out of my ass, thus following the footsteps of the original article, if Mortal Kombat sold a million copies, at £40, at 20% sales tax,VAT, that's £8 million the Government's gained from ADULTS pulling virtual heads off each other for giggles.

FOR ONE GAME.

IF the politicians get their way, they'll no doubt stop games like Battlefield 3, MW3, and in future, Saint's Row 3 and GTA 5, too. Can you imagine (let's go tabloid here) the number of schools and hospitals you could fund with the tax money gained from those games, and remember, gamers WILL buy them, they'll just buy them from other countries, sending their tax money to America or Europe instead.

As for the argument 'but once they're in homes, children will gain access to them!', ok, big guy, go ahead and ban beer on the same basis, ban beer in Australia, see how long you last before your head's on a spike outside the Sydney Opera House.

 

[xdiesp]

56% don't buy games and 44% are obviously lending them their licenses. This means we have to arrest EVERYBODY.