Heavy Rain Dev Says Pre-Owned Sales Cost it Millions

[Studs MacKenzie]

It seems strange that their main problem seems to be the big retailers, like GameStop, yet the publishers and developers are themselves giving gamers incentive to use these places with pre-order bonuses and the like.

Honestly, the industry isn't perfect, but the people who bought used weren't going to get it through legitimate means if they weren't going to get it at a discount anyway - one thing developers or publishers could do is just not make a bad game. Give us a reason to keep your shitty games! I still have my Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic, Halo, Shenmue 2.

 

[Mark Hardigan]

Pre-owned game sales is a real problem with the industry. However, the gaming industry is trying to fix the problem without trying to figure out what the root of the problem is (or not caring) and instead they are using ham-fisted tactics like release-day DLC, online clubs and other nonsense. If the gaming industry ever wants to fix the way that pre-owned games are hurting the developers, they need to first take a look at the root of the problem (games that aren't engaging enough to play more than a couple of times, the price of games, etc) and then take steps to correct them.

They're never going to stop pre-owned sales (nor should they as that would be such a blatant disregard of Consumer rights that it would be downright laughable), but they should be able to come up with some inventive tactics to either convince customers to buy new, or to buffer their profit margins from the cut that pre-owned game sales put into their bottom line.

Right now they're just beating a pig with a hammer and expecting it to turn into cooked ham.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

either that, or publishers need to start buying back their own games used and reselling them (online is easier, but obviously some stores would cut deals i'm sure) so they get the profits for those used games.


stop fucking with the customers, publishers/developers, fuck with the fuckhead gamestops and EBgames that are taking all your used game market shares

 

[immortalfrieza]

Excellent to see a developer actually attach some numbers to this obvious yet debated issue. It really is something that needs to be addressed on a much deeper level, and it will likely include some cooperation on both the dev/pub side and the retail side.

Of course, I think a lot of what Heavy Rain in particularly experienced is because of the type of game it was. When you create a completely cinematic game with little depth or reason to replay, you're automatically going to be at the mercy of the predatory used market.

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Pre-owned game sales is a real problem with the industry. However, the gaming industry is trying to fix the problem without trying to figure out what the root of the problem is (or not caring) and instead they are using ham-fisted tactics like release-day DLC, online clubs and other nonsense. If the gaming industry ever wants to fix the way that pre-owned games are hurting the developers, they need to first take a look at the root of the problem (games that aren't engaging enough to play more than a couple of times, the price of games, etc) and then take steps to correct them.

They're never going to stop pre-owned sales (nor should they as that would be such a blatant disregard of Consumer rights that it would be downright laughable), but they should be able to come up with some inventive tactics to either convince customers to buy new, or to buffer their profit margins from the cut that pre-owned game sales put into their bottom line.

Right now they're just beating a pig with a hammer and expecting it to turn into cooked ham.

Wonderfuly put! I do agree, they are aproaching the issue wrong.

I've said in the past, if they offered a disocount on DLC to those who buy new, that has the potental to make them even more money. It doesn't have to be much. But people like getting a discount. And further, it gives people a reason to hold onto their disks, creating fewer used sales the first month of launch.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Pre-owned game sales is a real problem with the industry. However, the gaming industry is trying to fix the problem without trying to figure out what the root of the problem is (or not caring) and instead they are using ham-fisted tactics like release-day DLC, online clubs and other nonsense. If the gaming industry ever wants to fix the way that pre-owned games are hurting the developers, they need to first take a look at the root of the problem (games that aren't engaging enough to play more than a couple of times, the price of games, etc) and then take steps to correct them.

They're never going to stop pre-owned sales (nor should they as that would be such a blatant disregard of Consumer rights that it would be downright laughable), but they should be able to come up with some inventive tactics to either convince customers to buy new, or to buffer their profit margins from the cut that pre-owned game sales put into their bottom line.

Right now they're just beating a pig with a hammer and expecting it to turn into cooked ham.

Wonderfuly put! I do agree, they are aproaching the issue wrong.

I've said in the past, if they offered a disocount on DLC to those who buy new, that has the potental to make them even more money. It doesn't have to be much. But people like getting a discount. And further, it gives people a reason to hold onto their disks, creating fewer used sales the first month of launch.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

 

[hooksashands]

All this loser cares about is his revenue stream, which is indicative of the whole problem. I'm sick of these assholes pouring on the guilt, telling me I don't give them enough money. You know what, Guillaume de Buttscratcher? Fuck you. I'm either stealing or buying your games used from now on, then deleting the file/breaking the disc when I'm done.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Even under the (At least in the states) inapplicable Droit de suite system of resale, the most they could be entitled to is 5%. And that's only if a single item was resold for millions of dollars. In the $60 range, said legal doctrine doesn't apply. But eve if it did, that's only around $2.50 per resale. And that's not something devs or publishers would be happy with. And the way things are headed, there's no way Gamesto would agree to give up their money for no good reason unless they had something in writing to prevent everything from going digital.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

Of course, they'll never do it, because it would mean that they'd have to look long term.

 

[Mrsoupcup]

Spoiler: I'd say this would be the biggest threat to the industry:

It's pre-order "deals", cut content and first day dlc. Shit like that opens the door to more fluff and less quality.

Oh and let's not forget Origin :/

 

[Drexlor]

What developers need to start doing is give gamers a reason to buy new and hold on to their copy instead of reselling. Instead of rewarding those who buy new, most try to punish the people who buy games used by locking them out of key features and game modes. The last thing you want to do is anger your potential customers. Even if they buy one game used, that doesn't mean that they can't consider buying the sequel new.

 

[agiganticpanda]

Press X to complain about used games.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Oh noes!

You lost over 5 million! That only leaves you with the sixty-some million you made! OH THE HUMANITY!!!

Seriously, it's because of people like you that the games industry looks so shitty.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Even under the (At least in the states) inapplicable Droit de suite system of resale, the most they could be entitled to is 5%. And that's only if a single item was resold for millions of dollars. In the $60 range, said legal doctrine doesn't apply. But eve if it did, that's only around $2.50 per resale. And that's not something devs or publishers would be happy with. And the way things are headed, there's no way Gamesto would agree to give up their money for no good reason unless they had something in writing to prevent everything from going digital.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

Of course, they'll never do it, because it would mean that they'd have to look long term.

yeah true, but still most games i see/know (i know a few people who work at gamestops and used game sales stores) and they say alot of times games get bought and resold 3-4 times (they see the sticker on the case and have to resticker it each time) so say it was 2.5 dollars, and you say it is bought and resold all those times (including the 3-4 times reselling), say they racked up 400,000 resold units, times that by 2.5 and you got about a million bucks there, now i know that isn't that much comparatively but hey, publishers need to stop squeezing developers balls so tightly and let them get back to the glory days of making games, so i'd be all for that if they could get that 5% back in resale

 

[Atmos Duality]

Ah arbitrage.
I'd actually care about this issue if I didn't already know how one-sided these implied EULAs and contracts are intended to be.

Until something more concrete and stable gets hammered out, I say let the First Sale Doctrine remain.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Even under the (At least in the states) inapplicable Droit de suite system of resale, the most they could be entitled to is 5%. And that's only if a single item was resold for millions of dollars. In the $60 range, said legal doctrine doesn't apply. But eve if it did, that's only around $2.50 per resale. And that's not something devs or publishers would be happy with. And the way things are headed, there's no way Gamesto would agree to give up their money for no good reason unless they had something in writing to prevent everything from going digital.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

Of course, they'll never do it, because it would mean that they'd have to look long term.

yeah true, but still most games i see/know (i know a few people who work at gamestops and used game sales stores) and they say alot of times games get bought and resold 3-4 times (they see the sticker on the case and have to resticker it each time) so say it was 2.5 dollars, and you say it is bought and resold all those times (including the 3-4 times reselling), say they racked up 400,000 resold units, times that by 2.5 and you got about a million bucks there, now i know that isn't that much comparatively but hey, publishers need to stop squeezing developers balls so tightly and let them get back to the glory days of making games, so i'd be all for that if they could get that 5% back in resale

That's barely a drop in the bucket, sadly, considering the cost of games. And it wouldn't even qualify for the 5%. The most would be around $1 for every game resold at $55. And publishers, in turn, would have to end their online pass system. Which, again, they'll never do.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Even under the (At least in the states) inapplicable Droit de suite system of resale, the most they could be entitled to is 5%. And that's only if a single item was resold for millions of dollars. In the $60 range, said legal doctrine doesn't apply. But eve if it did, that's only around $2.50 per resale. And that's not something devs or publishers would be happy with. And the way things are headed, there's no way Gamesto would agree to give up their money for no good reason unless they had something in writing to prevent everything from going digital.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

Of course, they'll never do it, because it would mean that they'd have to look long term.

yeah true, but still most games i see/know (i know a few people who work at gamestops and used game sales stores) and they say alot of times games get bought and resold 3-4 times (they see the sticker on the case and have to resticker it each time) so say it was 2.5 dollars, and you say it is bought and resold all those times (including the 3-4 times reselling), say they racked up 400,000 resold units, times that by 2.5 and you got about a million bucks there, now i know that isn't that much comparatively but hey, publishers need to stop squeezing developers balls so tightly and let them get back to the glory days of making games, so i'd be all for that if they could get that 5% back in resale

That's barely a drop in the bucket, sadly, considering the cost of games. And it wouldn't even qualify for the 5%. The most would be around $1 for every game resold at $55. And publishers, in turn, would have to end their online pass system. Which, again, they'll never do.

welp i guess there is just one thing to do then, and it's happened before.


crash time...

Spoiler: it's happened

Spoiler: it works

Spoiler: great games followed

hah you thought i meant the video game market crash?

crash bandicoot all the way =]

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Even under the (At least in the states) inapplicable Droit de suite system of resale, the most they could be entitled to is 5%. And that's only if a single item was resold for millions of dollars. In the $60 range, said legal doctrine doesn't apply. But eve if it did, that's only around $2.50 per resale. And that's not something devs or publishers would be happy with. And the way things are headed, there's no way Gamesto would agree to give up their money for no good reason unless they had something in writing to prevent everything from going digital.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

Of course, they'll never do it, because it would mean that they'd have to look long term.

yeah true, but still most games i see/know (i know a few people who work at gamestops and used game sales stores) and they say alot of times games get bought and resold 3-4 times (they see the sticker on the case and have to resticker it each time) so say it was 2.5 dollars, and you say it is bought and resold all those times (including the 3-4 times reselling), say they racked up 400,000 resold units, times that by 2.5 and you got about a million bucks there, now i know that isn't that much comparatively but hey, publishers need to stop squeezing developers balls so tightly and let them get back to the glory days of making games, so i'd be all for that if they could get that 5% back in resale

That's barely a drop in the bucket, sadly, considering the cost of games. And it wouldn't even qualify for the 5%. The most would be around $1 for every game resold at $55. And publishers, in turn, would have to end their online pass system. Which, again, they'll never do.

welp i guess there is just one thing to do then, and it's happened before.


crash time...

Spoiler: it's happened

Spoiler: it works

Spoiler: great games followed

hah you thought i meant the video game market crash?

crash bandicoot all the way =]

While not the crash I had in mind, I do think a market crash would be a good thing if things go much further. To perhaps teach them not to screw with a second hand market that has existed for 25 years that they've seen fit to complain about now.

 

[Periodic]

Selling products and buying used products is a basic consumer right. I don't understand why Monsieur Fondaumiere thinks he should get royalties he isn't legally entitled to.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

i get why they are bickering, but i still think they need to strain it out on places like gamestop and whatnot, not the customer, they need to make some kind of legal binding moment where if that publisher has a game sold back to that retailer, they get 15% of the used game sale profit each time it is resold (most game publishers are big companies these days so it's not that hard to keep track of these things, especially with programs like excel and easy shit like that)

This problem is pretty easy to solve, just work out a system where used game sellers have give the original developers a small cut of the profits for each used game of their's they sell, say, 1 dollar for every 10 dollar game sold. I suppose if they were to do that then no developer would ever have any reason whatsoever to create a game with any replay value, creating another problem, but creating more problems would happen with any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Even under the (At least in the states) inapplicable Droit de suite system of resale, the most they could be entitled to is 5%. And that's only if a single item was resold for millions of dollars. In the $60 range, said legal doctrine doesn't apply. But eve if it did, that's only around $2.50 per resale. And that's not something devs or publishers would be happy with. And the way things are headed, there's no way Gamesto would agree to give up their money for no good reason unless they had something in writing to prevent everything from going digital.

this is actually a good point, i wouldn't mind getting discounted DLC knowing i bought new, it is an easy way to get publishers on the customers good side (fuck you activision and your 15 dollar piece of shit map packs) while getting a nice chunk of profit and boosting new sales

Of course, they'll never do it, because it would mean that they'd have to look long term.

yeah true, but still most games i see/know (i know a few people who work at gamestops and used game sales stores) and they say alot of times games get bought and resold 3-4 times (they see the sticker on the case and have to resticker it each time) so say it was 2.5 dollars, and you say it is bought and resold all those times (including the 3-4 times reselling), say they racked up 400,000 resold units, times that by 2.5 and you got about a million bucks there, now i know that isn't that much comparatively but hey, publishers need to stop squeezing developers balls so tightly and let them get back to the glory days of making games, so i'd be all for that if they could get that 5% back in resale

That's barely a drop in the bucket, sadly, considering the cost of games. And it wouldn't even qualify for the 5%. The most would be around $1 for every game resold at $55. And publishers, in turn, would have to end their online pass system. Which, again, they'll never do.

welp i guess there is just one thing to do then, and it's happened before.


crash time...

Spoiler: it's happened

Spoiler: it works

Spoiler: great games followed

hah you thought i meant the video game market crash?

crash bandicoot all the way =]

While not the crash I had in mind, I do think a market crash would be a good thing if things go much further. To perhaps teach them not to screw with a second hand market that has existed for 25 years that they've seen fit to complain about now.

yeah i agree, that just came to me mid replying to your post so it was too tempting to not do that.

plus if i didnt have used games, i probably would have never gotten into dynasty warriors/star wars battlefront II/FF Crisis core/(countless other games from back in the day)