I really wanted to argue the point here, but rereading your post just makes me sigh hopelessly.segataDC said:Kids nowadays don't like to keep their games and build a collection, they game, sell and trade games on a regular basis. Shops like gamestop are taking advantage of this circular cycle to rip off the costumer. Charging 50$ multiple times on a single copy.
Is it really worth buying a used copy of la noire, deus ex or resistance 3 for 53$? Remember that not a single penny goes to the developers and you're only making gamestop richer.
You guys have several options that are better, imo, like Amazon or other on-line shops. For example European consumers can go to Amazon.co.uk a buy deus ex for 15,99 pounds, that's 25 dollars!
The limited edition of dark souls costs 43?, any physical shop near me wont sell it for less than 60/70?(new or used).
And I'm sure that, regardless of what country you live in, you can find better and more economic solutions on-line.
I think that used games can be a good thing, for example I just bought msg2 and msg3 for 15?, but when it comes to recent ip's I think you should search for options that not only benefit your wallet but also contribute to the industry.
but if you prefer to spend 50 dollars on a used game, that's up to you.
whatever floats your boat...
Like i said, i don't really care. I buy both new and used so i get the best of both worlds. I just don't get how people get so up in arms over this when we do it to practically every other product. Hell, Kijiji and Ebay are basically made to sell used items.Madara XIII said:Not to be an ass, but the same can be said for a used car dealership. Just because I didn't buy a new Volvo from them, but instead bought a used one from a dealership that mostly speaks spanish doesn't necessarily make me a bad person because I don't have the moolah to pay for one fresh out the company's bumholestefman said:no the point is that when someone buys the game used, that person has just avoided paying for it new and they lose a potential future customer. not that i care but you seem to have misinterpreted the problem.CM156 said:You're right. It doesn't.segataDC said:Remember that not a single penny goes to the developers and you're only making gamestop richer.
...
Your point? I mean, that's kinda how used products work. Did they, or did they not get paid the first time the game sold?
Yes? That's it, then.
Same goes with games. I JUST DON'T HAVE THE PRIVILEGE to buy every game I want in a new condition. It's not a crime, it's being fiscally responsible when I want a few hours of electronic entertainment.
Don't get me wrong I don't buy EVERY game used, because God forbid I actually make a sub-microscopic dent in the wallet of a developer. There are just some games that I don't see worth the full $60 or just some games I can't get any other way....especially GOOD PS2 games. Hell I'm proud of myself I didn't buy MW2 when it first came out, because disappointment hit harder than Yahtzee's words to a piece of paper.
What I'm trying to say is that not everyone has to buy the game New and shouldn't be chastised because they're not supporting the developers EVERYTIME, ALL THE TIME.
kiri2tsubasa said:*sigh* Another topic about used games and inevitably the topic of used cars come up.
The used car analogy that people seem to love to use is wrong in how it is typically presented. If you are going to present it then this is a bit more accurate of a description.
If you buy a car used, you get what you get and nothing else. Ohh, the radio doesn't work/sucks, well you have to shell out money to get it repaired/replaced. The clock doesn't work, well that will have to be repaired. There is something wrong with the engine and it has been shown to be related to wear and tear, well you have to spend money to repair it. Also, depending on where you gt the car from you may or may not get a warranty. Uncle Bob's used cars probably are not likely to get a warranty. BMW Certified Pre-Owned Cars, I think you get a warranty from them.
and you propose people take the risk on a game they may well not enjoy by buying it new, instead of maybe being able to reduce their risk? Used games benefit everyone, as if people take the risk on the used game that they wouldn't have done otherwise (seriously, I've done that a lot), if a sequel comes out, or the developer makes another game, you're far more likely to buy it new if you enjoyed it (me again. Took a punt on a £7 ffXII, I then got FFXIII new, but deffinately would not have if I didn't get 12). If you did not, the developer doesn't really deserve your money anyway (yes I am looking at you vampire rain)segataDC said:companies that have the money to make AAA's titles don't have a problem, but the thing is people will not buy weird, quirky innovative games. people usually think like this: "i'm going to buy battlefield 3 and fifa 12 for christmas! oh that Catherine game looks fun and weird! maybe i'll buy used for 10 bucks".CM156 said:Annnnnnd that's how the First Sale Doctrine works. Look it up. No other form of media needs money when it comes to second hand sales in order to survive. In fact, how has gaming got this far, considering we've had second hand sales from the word-go, if they are such a problem?NorthernStar said:Well, you're totally right when you say that the game did eventually make a profit or at least made moneyCM156 said:He said that after the game sold 2 million copies. Which turned a profit for them. And if the "loss" of 1 million sales caused him to "lose" 5-10 million euros, then he must have gained 10-20 million, correct?NorthernStar said:Quantic Dream's Heavy Rain lost between 5 and 10 million euro's to used sales (ref: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-12-used-market-cost-heavy-rain-1m-sales). Seriously, think about it. That's a huge loss and in the end it will only bite us gamers in the butt as the smaller devs won't be able to overcome these losses.(I have no idea how expensive this game was to create.)
But the fact that the game did make a profit isn't really my point, my point is the fact that they could've had 1 million extra sales, but lost those to the used market. It was simply an example of how the used market is costing devs a lot of money. Sure, there are still plenty of people (2 million in this case) who did buy the game new, but it must be frustrating to see so many people playing your game, whilst knowing that only two thirds of them paid you for it.... As Foundamiere puts it:
"On my small level it's a million people playing my game without giving me one cent. And my calculation is, as Quantic Dream, I lost between ?5 and ?10 million worth of royalties because of second-hand gaming."
They're not "lost" sales if they never would have happened at the developers new retail price. That's how I see it anyway. When a game is bought used, it means that The original gamer was tired of it and had exhausted its features to the fullest extent he wanted, meaning that the game has exhausted its play cycle. Some triple A titles are still at $50-$60 a year after launch, and if enough people are trading it in enough to make used copies worth only $30, I'll sure as hell take that deal. A lot of the time, I wouldn't buy a game above a certain price, and wait for the first time the game comes into my price range. That's usually used, unless the game has been out a long time and is only $10-$20.NorthernStar said:Well, you're totally right when you say that the game did eventually make a profit or at least made moneyCM156 said:He said that after the game sold 2 million copies. Which turned a profit for them. And if the "loss" of 1 million sales caused him to "lose" 5-10 million euros, then he must have gained 10-20 million, correct?NorthernStar said:Quantic Dream's Heavy Rain lost between 5 and 10 million euro's to used sales (ref: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-09-12-used-market-cost-heavy-rain-1m-sales). Seriously, think about it. That's a huge loss and in the end it will only bite us gamers in the butt as the smaller devs won't be able to overcome these losses.(I have no idea how expensive this game was to create.)
But the fact that the game did make a profit isn't really my point, my point is the fact that they could've had 1 million extra sales, but lost those to the used market. It was simply an example of how the used market is costing devs a lot of money. Sure, there are still plenty of people (2 million in this case) who did buy the game new, but it must be frustrating to see so many people playing your game, whilst knowing that only two thirds of them paid you for it.... As Foundamiere puts it:
"On my small level it's a million people playing my game without giving me one cent. And my calculation is, as Quantic Dream, I lost between ?5 and ?10 million worth of royalties because of second-hand gaming."
Okay, I don't care what your point is now, it's instantly made invalid by that f*cking huge generalisation.segataDC said:Kids nowadays don't like to keep their games and build a collection, they game, sell and trade games on a regular basis....