56% of American Gamers Don't Buy Games

[x-machina]

My brother and I, never buy the same game, because we'll just lend it to each other later. It's a great system especially this time of year, when we have so many games getting released.

So, yeah this isn't surprising at all.

 

[Athinira]

Because in most other cases there is either a longer delay before the product can be purchased used (consumer electronics, traditional used book stores), a much larger difference in prices (used and new cars) or a greater risk of loss of quality (cars, furniture, clothes).

Since there is also a longer delay before each normal non-resale purchase, the argument for longer delay before a resale is void. What matters is the resale percentage (aka. how huge a percentage of the sales that are re-sales compared to real sales). My guess is that the percentage doesn't vary much (at least not that much) between industries.

Your other argument about much larger price differences all depends on time of sale. A car resold a year after it's been purchased is still going to fit a hefty price, while a car sold 5 years after purchase is going for a very low price. Games that aren't limited by registration, account-binding and serials etc. (aka. most console games) aren't much different.

Your argument about loss of quality is valid, but mostly only for console games. PC games are more or less either DLC-bound these days (like Arkham City buyers only getting Catwoman if they purchase the real deal. Other games are following trend).

I'd be lying if i weren't admitting to there being SOME disparity between the normal industry or other industries, especially for console games, but it's not that huge.

 

[Madkipz]

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

33 - 50 - 70% - 90 off initial price depending on how much they actually support their customer base and make them feel wanted.

We're talking about launch day, not future sales Madkipz.

its a triple AAA title. Sell it for 40 - 60 usd depending on content.

If its a primarily multiplayer game you should probably sell it for 40 (i.e pontential profits going up because of continous support and dlc sales campains to flood servers back up with a steady "subscriber" base).

If its singleplayer RPG ala Mass effect you should pay a bit extra like 60 and then some for dlc later down the line. Why? because its a movie, its different. Animation costs, cutscenes costs, 40 - 60 - infinite amount of playtime. Its different.

 

[Guilherme Zoldan]

Five hundred million dollars? Is this guy high?

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

Dude, not even Michael Bay movies get budgets this big. Are you nuts?

 

[Rawne1980]

And yet people will come here and say that used sales don't cause the publisher any reason to worry...

To be fair, even though i've argued for buying used games, i've never said Publishers should not worry...

I said I don't give a shit if publishers worry.

Out of all the games released on a yearly basis I only ever buy between 2 and 5 on release at full price.

Before I gave my 360 to my son I would wait until games I might fancy a play on came in used or borrow them off a friend.

Since I took to full time PC gaming I wait until I find a game I want on Amazon for around £10.

Unless it's a game I really, really want then i'll buy it at release (Skyrim, i'm looking at you).

I don't buy games to line a publishers pockets or feed his/her kids, I buy games to enjoy and i've got kids of my own to worry about so I like a bargain.

Doesn't matter that I can afford the games I want at full price I don't see the point in paying it when I can wait a few weeks and get it for a third of the price.

But people seem to overlook the biggest point of used sales.... And i'm going to put it in bold so someone may see it....

A lot of the time when people buy a used game, they had no intention of paying full price for it anyway. If used sales didn't exist then there are a lot of people who still wouldn't buy those games brand new at full price. Take away used sales and people will still borrow them off friends or wait for prices to drop dramatically before they buy.

 

[ph0b0s123]

56% of American Gamers Don't Buy Games

A new market study has indicated that "swapsies" is the most popular game of 2011.

Although game-sharing isn't a novel concept in any sense, new research conducted by games market research firm Newzoo [http://www.newzoo.com] has shown that games are now more likely to be shared amongst friends and family than to stay with the original user. Consequently, according to Newzoo's report, more than half of the 82 million gamers in the United States don't actually have to spend money on games - and of the 44% who do buy games, 85% of them say they regularly purchase pre-owned titles.

For a quarter of the group who do spend money on games, almost half of their budget goes towards pre-owned titles. In total, the report says, the average American gamer spends 23% of their gaming budget buying pre-owned.

The report then expands on the ballooning DLC market, which is expected to become worth $960 million in US sales alone this year. In total, 12% of the money spent on games in the US goes towards DLC, and Newzoo estimates that American and European gamers combined will spend $1.7 billion on DLC in 2011.

Taken as a whole, this information reads as a primer on why big publishers have developed such a fondness for DLC and online passes in recent years. AAA titles are expensive and it often makes sense for regular gamers to either wait for a new copy to appear in the pre-owned section or just borrow it from a friend - but doing that cuts out any profit for the developers and publishers, unless they add on DLC or see a major boost in early sequel sales. Though many gamers are irritated by "day-one" DLC and the concept of online passes, it's hard to see how publishers can avoid these methods without seeing a marked decrease in their profits.

The whole assumption this article is based on, is false. The assumption is that the stats being provided show a new and increasing phenomenon that is happening. Something that has never happened in the history of video gaming. The new phenomenon of people lending games to their friends or buying them used. Which of course is rubbish. No stats are offered to show that this is even something that has increased and so is a bigger 'problem'.

"now more likely to be shared amongst friends and family than to stay with the original user"
Who says, where are the details about what level swapping was in the past?

"but doing that cuts out any profit for the developers and publishers"
If this is something that has been going on in videogames for a long time, why is it lost profits? That's right it isn't lost profit, it is a lost profit opportunity. An opportunity the industry is trying to brainwash convince or force the consumer into giving them.

This is the point that certainly annoys me about this whole situation. It is not that the publishers are losing anything, it is that they want to change the existing market to one that gives them profits where they would not reasonably have expected it before. Do I blame them, no they are business, it's what they do. Will I shut up complaining about it, hell no. It's just a shame others are quite happy to bend over and happily take the industry changing the market in a way that move the balance of power more in their favour.

I love that renting movies is something that people think almost nothing of, but doing the same with games is the worst sin ever. Or lending a movie to a friend is not questioned but now doing the same with videogames is. The answer is that there is no difference, just the guilt campaign the games industry is trying, to make you feel bad about the latter.

And even though I feel this way most of my games are new.

 

[Irridium]

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

33 - 50 - 70% - 90 off initial price depending on how much they actually support their customer base and make them feel wanted.

We're talking about launch day, not future sales Madkipz.

Well I don't know about him, but I would simply not develop a game that has such a stupidly-high cost. I would instead take that money, split it up into $10,000,000(or less) divisions, and make 50 smaller, more interesting games with a lower price tag and have a much, much easier and better chance at making a profit.

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

Five hundred million dollars? Is this guy high?

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

Dude, not even Michael Bay movies get budgets this big. Are you nuts?

According to Ea's last major budget report their development costs average around 208million and spend up to 300 million on advertisement, Transformers 3 got 530million just for shooting prior to advertisement.

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

33 - 50 - 70% - 90 off initial price depending on how much they actually support their customer base and make them feel wanted.

We're talking about launch day, not future sales Madkipz.

Well I don't know about him, but I would simply not develop a game that has such a stupidly-high cost. I would instead take that money, split it up into $10,000,000(or less) divisions, and make 50 smaller, more interesting games with a lower price tag and have a much, much easier and better chance at making a profit.

You wouldn't be making triple A titles anymore just well funded indy titles I don't think what few fans EA or Activision have would be pleased with the direction change.

 

[aba1]

Of course? Why would someone buy new when they can get the same thing for less?

Maybe if game makers didn't charge just shy of a hundred bucks for a six hour diversion they might see more people willing to invest in a new copy.

The customer doesn't owe the publisher or the dev anything. Why should they care about their profit, especially since so many these days seem perfectly happy to screw them?

Fo sho fo sho indeed

 

[MetalDooley]

True, but they should stop punishing the consumer for doing the financially smart thing, and instead go after Gamestop and others like them for not sharing the profits on used sales.

I do think Used sales hurt the industry, but I don't think publishers are fighting it the right way. Instead of trying to force players to buy new, they should be finding ways to get money from used sales.

And why should Gamestop and other retailers share profits from used sales?The publishers have already been paid for their product by the retailers.What,pray tell,makes the games industry so goddamn special that they deserve to be paid more than once for the same product?

 

[Nurb]

And yet people will come here and say that used sales don't cause the publisher any reason to worry...

True, but they should stop punishing the consumer for doing the financially smart thing, and instead go after Gamestop and others like them for not sharing the profits on used sales.

I do think Used sales hurt the industry, but I don't think publishers are fighting it the right way. Instead of trying to force players to buy new, they should be finding ways to get money from used sales.

That's like saying car companies should get a cut of used car sales because people who wait a year to get the current model car is costing them money. They make a product and they sell it, they don't have any rights to money from third party sales, same as any industry. HP doesn't demand money from ebay when someone buys a laptop, even though they use the site's tech support and servers for driver downloads.

Companies need to stop whining and start making incentives for new purchases instead of hassling the customer with DRM, third party software, and day-one DLC or forced online connection for a single player game. Car companies know they compete with the used market, that's why they're using those business degrees to find ways to get people to buy new.

 

[ElPatron]

And yet people will come here and say that used sales don't cause the publisher any reason to worry...

I haven't bought BF3 because of Origin (among other reasons, but this one was the buzz-killer) and I am not planning on buying used/borrowing/torrent it because I simply lost interest.
By your logic, I am hurting the industry too because I lose interest quickly.


The fact is, many people don't have a lot of money and won't buy all the games they want. If the "used" option was unavailable, they wouldn't buy the game anyway, so no "potential" profit is lost.




Also: car industry.
/thread

 

[Richard Allen]

Five hundred million dollars? Is this guy high?

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

Dude, not even Michael Bay movies get budgets this big. Are you nuts?

According to Ea's last major budget report their development costs average around 208million and spend up to 300 million on advertisement, Transformers 3 got 530million just for shooting prior to advertisement.

It's doesn't really matter what the budget is. Are they making a profit? So why are people arguing that they need to make more money and to do that people should just give up their rights?

 

[Guilherme Zoldan]

Five hundred million dollars? Is this guy high?

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

Dude, not even Michael Bay movies get budgets this big. Are you nuts?

According to Ea's last major budget report their development costs average around 208million and spend up to 300 million on advertisement, Transformers 3 got 530million just for shooting prior to advertisement.

Dude, its EA. They are amazing money wasters, not to mention liars. Most games don't have budgets that big.

 

[Lunar Templar]

its called being broke, get over it

 

[Traun]

Hey, publishers, if SO MANY PEOPLE aren't buying new, and one of the big reasons is price, perhaps it'd be a good idea to reduce your fucking prices already. You know, like what any other business would do.

A publisher receives 17$ per a 60$ game sold( PC market excluded), when the price goes down they receive even less. Now mister marketer, how much do you think a game should cost, so that the additional sales compensate the lower price?

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

Five hundred million dollars? Is this guy high?

snip

I didn't say they need to give me a damn thing. It's just they need not to ***** when I choose to buy their game used when it was too damn expensive for me to buy it new. If Publishers want people to buy new they need to sell cheap and stop treating those that buy used, rent, and or share games like they stole money out their pockets.

Just for curiosities sake what price do you think a Triple A title should go at you know with the mulit-year development and total costs being over 500million dollars?

Dude, not even Michael Bay movies get budgets this big. Are you nuts?

According to Ea's last major budget report their development costs average around 208million and spend up to 300 million on advertisement, Transformers 3 got 530million just for shooting prior to advertisement.

It's doesn't really matter what the budget is. Are they making a profit? So why are people arguing that they need to make more money and to do that people should just give up their rights?

The problem is most of the prices people offer wouldn't get any of the publishers a profit, hell EA runs the highest profit margin a cool 14.2%.

 

[Realitycrash]

Here's a novel idea: Why don't we simply let the game-industry crash? Because surely it can't survive with todays standard.
..Oh, wait, it WON'T, because Enough people buy the games in order for them to survive and still net a large profit. Why should I buy a brand new game when I can buy preowned? Because I need to "help the publishers"? Why? Those who make good games will survive anyway, those who won't will get culled. It's social darwinism. If, for some reason, "everyone" starts buying pre-owned (something that technically can't happen, but let's ignore that), and the publishers/Stuidos stat going bankrupt, doesn't mean there won't be any more AAA-games. If there is a demand for it, someone will fill the gap. A minor studio will step up, and do things differently, and produce an AAA-game that people WILL be willing to pay full price for, etc.
Gaming will never die. There will always be a new CoD coming out. I'd rather see the whole business crumble and be rebuilt from scratch than accept the argument that we should always by games new, because publishers and studios want to stay on top and not lose their big-dog position.
Fuck you Activision, fuck you EA, fuck you Ubisoft. Think games won't evolve and continue to bring us pleasure because you won't be around? Think again.

What about the small studios? Well, people tend to buy their games because A; They are cheap and B; we feel sympathy.
They aren't in general threatened by this sort of thing.