Cliff Bleszinski: Don't Punish Pre-Owned Buyers

[HaloHappy]

Here's how I see it, feel free to yell at me all you want it's not going to change. I look at it from a math stand point. If I buy a used game, I save five-ten dollars, and if I were to buy x amount of used games, I could get another one with the money I saved. It doesn't mean I won't buy new games, I'm going to get Reach the second it's released, but with the times being like they are used games seem good to a consumer like me.

But at least we have a well-respected Game head speaking out against EA, I'm glad for that.

 

[Brotherofwill]

First time I feel like aknowledging Cliffy B. He's right on the money. Punishing isn't the way to go, small rewards (that don't give you a skill advantage) are the way to go.

I don't mind ten dollar... it works and it's not "punishing" pre owned users per se.

How is it not punishing pre-owned customers?

 

[rated pg]

Free avatar items, themes and gamer pics would probably do it. Small, meaningless incentives that would otherwise cost the gamer a small amount of cash.

I honestly think it would work, people like small pointless free things.

True, but the problem with 'Project 10 Dollar' and what Epic did with Gears 2 and even what Cliffy is talking about to an extent is this:

What if you don't play online? Or, more to the point, what if you don't HAVE an online console connection?

I do, and I'd expect most people here do. But unless it's something like physical items in a collector's edition, digital content is not always the way to go. Maybe if you have a one time use unlock code in the box that you register on a website, that might work. But again, only if you have net access in your home. It's great to assume people do and I for one think it's essential. But I'm not everyone.

The other thing is talking it up. People need to know about the existence of it. Something THQ did rather poorly with UFC Undisputed 2010.

And finally, make sure those codes don't expire anytime soon. I understand the appeal of not having those codes last forever, but people buying new copies of Dragon Age will be interested to note the codes for Shale/the Blood Dragon armor expired at the end of April. That could be some agreement worked out with Gamestop; after all, being at war with the main company that distributes and sells your game isn't exactly a very profitable sounding idea. Still, it's something to keep in mind.

Ultimately, content you can buy at a set price discourages but will not eliminate used sales. Reason being: Gamestop/whoever can just price drop the game. In Canada, pre-owned copies of UFC 2010 are 49.99, new are 64.99 at EB Games/Gamestop. So with the Edge card, you're saving upwards of $20 versus new, and the online code is $5. So you're still saving plenty.

 

[Richard Allen]

Holy crap - an industry personality that game buyers, even pre-owned buyers are still game buyers.

respect +1.

-m

A pre-owned buyer isn't really a buyer. None of that money goes to the game developers, just the retailers, and considering the relationship between retailers and publishers borders on actively hostile it's practically like funding "the enemy".

I don't understand what Cliffy is getting at with, "more flies with honey than with vinegar..." The free $10 worth of DLC is honey to entice people to buy the game new.

So you buy all of your cars new right? And every apartment or home that may interest you is brand new, specifically made for you to purchase new right? You don't have to answer me, I know the answer. Project $10 would be illegal in ever sense of the word if our laws could keep up with the pace of modern technology and development. Please don't tell me that you think it is ok to have features like cruise control or air conditioning enabled only if you buy a car new, the first sale doctrine was made for a reason and eventually I hope to god our laws catch up because this should be straight up illegal... $10 fucking dollars to play multi-player, yea you continue ruining what others have enjoyed for years while not sending publishers out of business buy eating up this shit /end rant

 

[Space Jawa]

First time I feel like aknowledging Cliffy B. He's right on the money. Punishing isn't the way to go, small rewards (that don't give you a skill advantage) are the way to go.

I don't mind ten dollar... it works and it's not "punishing" pre owned users per se.

How is it not punishing pre-owned customers?

How, exactly, does PTD punish those pre-owned purchasers? They can still buy the DLC later if they have a need for it, and if the game has been out long enough, it wouldn't be hard to argue that they're paying the same cost (or possibly even less all the same) as the person who bought it new. And that assumes that they're genuinely interested in the DLC to begin with.

All PTD does is reward people for buying new by providing them with a bonus. Not providing said bonus to people who are not interested in following the requirements needed to get said bonus is not a punishment. By the carrot and stick analogy, PTD uses only the carrot, and the stick is nowhere to be seen.

 

[DRD 1812]

Used game buyers are game buyers. Period.

No. They aren't. Period.

Who the money goes to and in what quantity on any given transaction are entirely irrelevent factors.

They are? So all of those publishers and developers didn't go out of business because they didn't have enough money? Why did they go out of business? Not enough moxie?

The fact is that used game trades and sales help to drive new game sales,

Is this true? Why would a used-buyer suddenly become a new buyer? Why would you ever voluntarily spend $60 on something you can get for $30?

and provde more people the opportunity to play more games, leading them to become fans of series they otherwise could not afford to have gotten into.

While this is true,

A used game buyer is a potential lifetime customer, has increased their buying power on future purchases,

Buying power is meaningless if you don't give your money to the people who actually make the product.

and has committed no illegal or immoral act. Punishing them is unfair and greedy.

Not giving someone BONUS material is not punishing them. By this logic any incentive, bonus, gift, or rebate is just another way to screw over someone.

A used market is a product of a healthy industry, and anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong.

A healthy retailer industry. You can talk about how "the rising tide lifts all the boats" for as long as you want, but it's still a fact that used-copy money does NOT go to the publishers. That's tantamount to buying an armful of corn from a downtown farmer's market and paying the guy who owns the parkinglot.

 

[b4k4]

Honestly, the whole $10 DLC thing doesn't bother me too much. As long as it's something like Mass Effect 2's Cerberus Network, where the content isn't an essential or even particularly important part of the game, it's really not too far off of the avatar items or Legion's other suggestions.

Of course the reason I'm more or less ok with this concept might have something to do with a magazine article I read before the 360 and PS3 came out that suggested the possibility of future generations of consoles having certain safeguards in place that would prevent playing pre-owned, rented, or borrowed games on the systems.

I say as long as the developers don't take this $10 thing too far, there's no reason to get worked up about it. But since the key parts of human nature are Greed and Stupidity...well, it wouldn't be a bad idea to keep an eye on the situation.

 

[luckycharms8282]

in Gears 2 didn't you need to buy the game new in order to get the flashback maps for free? So didnt they do the same thing EA is doing?

 

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

I don't mind ten dollar... it works and it's not "punishing" pre owned users per se.

How is it not punishing pre-owned customers?

It's DLC outside of the main game. You don't need it, if we believe the statistics most people won't want it.

It's not subtracting from the original game, it's just adding extra incentive.

(Except the sport titles that block online gameplay... that's too far)

 

[jamez525]

... Epic Games headliner Cliff(y B)leszinski ...

I don't get it. Is that a joke that's gone straight over my head? Or a typo?

On topic: Surprising piece of thoughtfulness from Mr Bleszinski. I remember what he had to say about Mirror's Edge...

It is just because he is commonly referred to as Cliffy B, rather than Cliff Bleszinski

My lord this was a disappointingly average 100th post.

 

[Jared]

He makes a good point, dont punish the people wanting to buy bargains, but, entice them to buy new...I think, although I hate saying it. Project $10 is actually not a bad idea

 

[Richard Allen]

and has committed no illegal or immoral act. Punishing them is unfair and greedy.

Not giving someone BONUS material is not punishing them. By this logic any incentive, bonus, gift, or rebate is just another way to screw over someone.

A used market is a product of a healthy industry, and anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong.

A healthy retailer industry. You can talk about how "the rising tide lifts all the boats" for as long as you want, but it's still a fact that used-copy money does NOT go to the publishers. That's tantamount to buying an armful of corn from a downtown farmer's market and paying the guy who owns the parking lot.

So having access to multi-player is a bonus? Used car/computer equipment/everything doesn't go the the original manufacturer. The fact is if publishers/developers can't make a game worth keeping then original buyers have every right to sell that game at it's full value with out a diminished worth because they are disabling features. It has started out as vanity items which is a bonus, to map packs made on release (which is borderline a "added feature"), to multi-player which in no fucking right mind is a bonus, and is very much part of the core game play.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

incentivize

Is that a word? Spell check says that it is not...

OT:

I'm fine with Project Ten Dollar and stuff like that.

 

[Lionsfan]

I'm of the belief that anyone who considers themselves a gamer has a responsibility to buy games new. Now, its one thing to buy a 20 year old NES game off ebay but to buy a game used 3 days after release for $5 less than new at Gamestop is a disservice to the people that made it.

Except that by saving 5 bucks I can buy dinner for the night too. Sure you can say that everyone has a responsibility to buy new. I say the game companies have the responsibility not to try and fuck me. Which companies like EA are doing

 

[RoboGeek]

you also should punish buyers of your games with crappy DRMs to try and protect from pirates on the pc should you cliffy.........(sorry epic have been talking shit about pc gaming for a while and this is sorta on the same lines as that)

 

[DRD 1812]

So you buy all of your cars new right? And every apartment or home that may interest you is brand new, specifically made for you to purchase new right? You don't have to answer me, I know the answer.

The house/apartment comparison is a completely different type of industry. As for the car, you're right, I have only bought used cars thus far in my life. Guess what? I don't go around driving my used car while claiming to be doing Mazda a favor.

Project $10 would be illegal in ever sense of the word if our laws could keep up with the pace of modern technology and development.

Explain to me how this is in any way, shape, or form illegal. This is like saying every late-night infomercial is breaking the law, "but if you call now we'll throw in these steak knives for free!"
"What?! I didn't call then and now I have to buy the steak knife bonus seperately? That's illegal!!"

Please don't tell me that you think it is ok to have features like cruise control or air conditioning enabled only if you buy a car new, the first sale doctrine was made for a reason and eventually I hope to god our laws catch up because this should be straight up illegal... $10 fucking dollars to play multi-player, yea you continue ruining what others have enjoyed for years while not sending publishers out of business buy eating up this shit /end rant

Drop the car analogy, it doesn't make any sense. And no, these things are not illegal when it comes to software becasue something called a END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT exists. Heard of those? They're like these little contracts that dictate how a consumer may use a product. When your Hyundai Sonata comes with a contract saying it is illegal to sell your car start complaining.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Ea really does have the best idea here and if any idea should be gone with is that. Seriously though putting in a 15 digit code is too much effort? How lazy can you be? I see no problem in putting in a small few numbers if I get free stuff.

 

[Ponchponcho]

Possible solution would be for developers to provide a way for people to sell their games back to them directly, I know "Why would a developer pay to get there own game back?" Well simply they reseal it with fresh online codes (or just do away with them) and sell them at a discount as pre-owned. Consumer gets some money for their games developers get to see returns for selling used games, and Gamestop has to compete or deal with developers or else lose business.

Just an idea.

USA 1-0

 

[jericu]

Actually, since flies are attracted to rotting meat, and vinegar comes from rotting meat, you actually catch more flies with vinegar than with honey. But otherwise, yeah, Cliffy B definitely brought up some good points here.