Heavy Rain Dev Says Pre-Owned Sales Cost it Millions

[cdstephens]

I'm somewhat sure lowering prices would actually solve a lot of problems, just saying...

 

[SenseOfTumour]

As for the above, I'd suggest the flaw is in any game without multiplayer or massive reply value. Any game that's worth the cost for a single run thru, suddenly is devalued.

However, I could refer people to the Jim Q episode on replay value there.

I did however keep Portal around to let others try it, maybe I'm evil and a dirty pirate there too, however, as the three or four people who tried it, under my encouragement, even tho they may never have heard of it without me, obviously would have run to buy it full price, if they hadn't got to play it at my place. /sarcasm

If used games are evil, so is renting, lending, letting people play games that you own, and local multiplayer.

I can see why there's little sympathy tbh.

 

[Arsen]

This is why I feel bad about buying used books. The author will never see a dime. Regardless of how much money you make, how entitled you feel as the consumber doesn't take away the fact that you OWE the guy something for the experience alone.

People make it up the ladder to earn such things by talent. Talent which is being viewed, played, and seen at the behest of the individual meant to receive profit from it. People can attempt to justify it all they want. "I can't afford it" isn't a decent answer.

 

[Adzma]

I would hope one does not prove a hypocrite in such an inflamatory statement, and does not ever wait until sales in retail stores, go to garage sales down the block or ever picked up any item from the "used" category.

If one does the above while stating such, I am even more disappoint indeed.

You realise that discount sales in retail stores don't effect buying the game from the manufacturer in the first place right? They're still being bought from the publisher and thus the game is generating money.

Also I have bought used of course, however that is only when the game is no longer printed new anymore, i.e. games from the very beginning of and before the current console generation.

 

[Princess Rose]

Do you realize what kind of precedence that would set in courts for every other industry in America?

If the video game industry, then shy not book publishers?
Why not film companies and car manufacturers?

... you say that like it's a bad thing.

Would I like a law where used book stores paid a (very small) royalty to the author when reselling their book? YES.

Same for films.

And cars, sure, that's only fair.

You wouldn't make it a full royalty, but some sort of partial royalty. Say 30% of what the manufacturer normally gets. I'd pay that, and gladly, knowing that the ARTISTS behind my favorite books, movies, and games got paid a little extra for it. The same for music.

 

[Arsen]

Do you realize what kind of precedence that would set in courts for every other industry in America?

If the video game industry, then shy not book publishers?
Why not film companies and car manufacturers?

... you say that like it's a bad thing.

Would I like a law where used book stores paid a (very small) royalty to the author when reselling their book? YES.

Same for films.

And cars, sure, that's only fair.

You wouldn't make it a full royalty, but some sort of partial royalty. Say 30% of what the manufacturer normally gets. I'd pay that, and gladly, knowing that the ARTISTS behind my favorite books, movies, and games got paid a little extra for it. The same for music.

It's these stores that are reaping the profits, not the individuals whom the money is meant to be given to. You know. The ones who put their dedication and hard work ethic into. I feel a tremendous amount of guilt in buying used books when I couldh have instead chosen to be humble by supporting the publisher and the author in question. First editions and hardcovers that are no longer in print however...are a different story.

Still. Everyone who has something of theirs sell should reap the rewards of their labor. The "I can't afford it" argument and the "I don't want to use MY hard earned money for something I don't feel is worth the deniro" argument come down to one thing: Don't buy the product if you're going to make it into a money issue for yourself. Your cheating the creator.

 

[Damien Granz]

I'm also tired of being called a thief for exercising rights that in any other entertainment medium or physical product is just considered day to day business.

Publishers would love to turn every interaction with a product into a transaction. They'd like it if every time I even thought of their game, money would get siphoned out into their wallet.

But here's the thing, publishers already got their money from the game. Retailers bought their game. Then it's up to those retailers what to do to move their own product. If those retailers think getting themselves their money's worth of their investment in a published material is to resell it, to generate interest in a customer base that would otherwise have no interest in that material (or who otherwise would resort to piracy), then that's their prerogative.

Then those retailers are able, through generating increased interest and revenue from that untapped customer base, to turn these customers into repeat buyers. They might had come for the half price used Heavy Rain, but that moves consoles and hardware, generates interest and hype which generates more sales. Friends tell their friends about the game and so on. Money's moved around the system.

Retailer employees are payed wages to move the product, then they go out and spend on their own games. Life moves on.

But I'm being told that playing into this system, that honestly ultimately moves their product, I'm no better than a thief. That I might as well not owned the game, owned the system, owned the subscription to the networks, none of that.

That, I, as a customer, am not allowed to see the purchase as an investment, I'm not allowed to bargain or purchase intelligently based on my means and my needs. No, I have to buy, buy, buy and take the first and only offer on the table. That only apparently publishers are allowed to play the game of the free market intelligently. The rest of us must just blindly reach out, and grab at whatever random product and just hope to god it's not a pile of crap this time around.

I'm told things like games don't depreciate in value, like a 'real' object does, so they're not comparable to other industries. Which is precisely why the only video game in history is and continues to be pong, because no experience apparently becomes stale. And why everybody uses their perfectly serviceable phones and computers and consoles from 1997.

You know, for an industry that shuffles 4 genres every 10 years (Heavy Rain is completely the same was the FMV games of the early CD capable PC era, or Sega CD games, which is in turn completely the same as the adventure games preceding those, just prettier), it seems disingenuous for you to complain about us selling our used products, when you sold us a used product in the first place.

 

[fenrizz]

Do you realize what kind of precedence that would set in courts for every other industry in America?

If the video game industry, then shy not book publishers?
Why not film companies and car manufacturers?

... you say that like it's a bad thing.

Would I like a law where used book stores paid a (very small) royalty to the author when reselling their book? YES.

Same for films.

And cars, sure, that's only fair.

You wouldn't make it a full royalty, but some sort of partial royalty. Say 30% of what the manufacturer normally gets. I'd pay that, and gladly, knowing that the ARTISTS behind my favorite books, movies, and games got paid a little extra for it. The same for music.

Then what about those that manufacture steel, paper, ink or plastic?
Do they get a cut of it too?

30% would drive prices of all second house goods up, making it more expensive for the consumer.

Besides, as I said previously, once you sell something it is no longer yours.
Why should you be entitled to royalties when you have already have gotten your asking price?

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

But its not, a author doesn't spend that much money on writing the book, and the publisher is the one who fits the bill for production and then the author get's what's left from the sales.

But a game company spends so much more money and man power on producing a video game, and still have to wrangle with a publisher.

There isn't a good comparison.

You have no idea just how little authors make from writing. Not to mention that to get published in the first place many authors have to accept deals whereby they pay part of the printing costs or even self-publish. Being a games developer, minus the ridiculous crunch time, is a much better way to earn a living than most authors can enjoy, because you are paid a salary with bonuses.

The fact that companies spend so much money on production that it becomes a necessity to sell millions of copies just to break even is not indicative of their deserving any special treatment with regards to the secondary market. They have a faulty business model, and they should start reducing production costs to make better returns. The AAA industry is not sustainable, and all their bellicose chest-pounding towards second hand sales is only distracting from the inevitable.

 

[Raddra]

Tough shit. I dont see car manufacturers whining that half their cars get bought pre-owned...

This.

And yes the comparison DOES work.

Games are a product. The same as every other product out there that is not consumable.

Games, Cars, Books, Movies, furniture, appliances.

All are bought and sold and bought second hand.

No other industry complains about this except the games market. Its juvenile and immature. However unlike all those other industries the games market IS immature and juvenile since its a new industry currently in its teens.

Short answer: the games industry needs to grow up and stop complaining about this.

And the very fact they're seeing those second hand sales as 'lost sales' is even more immature. The fast majority who buy second hand would NOT have bought the full price. They bought it at the price they were comfortable with, and did not see fit to invest in the full priced product for many possible reasons, the biggest being full price cost is too high for them to justify to themselves. Mainly because the price of games is currently too high, want 3 million sales? drop the price to £30, you'll get a lot closer to 3 million sales at £30 than 2 million at £40. That is more money.

Second hand gaming does a lot more good for the industry than they are willing to admit. It gains fans of franchises and gets the word about the out there, and shares the experience of certain developers with others that they would not have seen otherwise in the friendship circles of folk who can not afford or could not justify buying a full priced game. People are willing to take a risk on entering your games franchise at the lower cost of a second hand game whereas they might never want to take the risk of not enjoying it at a full price, and might buy full price for the next installment in your franchise if they enjoyed it enough. And this is coming down again to the lack of game demo's these days.

Honestly this is just such juvenile behavior from this industry I find it pathetic.

 

[shrub231]

dude, now your talking, since you have yet to pattent this idea i shall run with it, in just a few short years i will design the moddern equivilant of the library at alexandria for video games!!!!

 

[milkkart]

OH BOO FUCKING HOO DEVS.

the car industry gets way more fucked over by preowned sales, you don't hear them crying to the government for ridiculous schemes to... OH WAIT... yeah. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrappage_program]

edit: since it was quite ambiguous i'll just clarify; i'm against single-use codes and other forms of consumer-fucking to stop pre-owned trading.

 

[Merkavar]

i can understand that game companies dont want a 2nd hand market but i dont see how they can stop it. or that should.

apply what the game developers want to do to any other product and it just sounds stupid.

a furniture company complaining cause people buy 2nd hand furniture and start removing a cushion from lounges each time its sold 2nd hand

a car company removing 3rd and 2nd gears from a car when sold 2nd hand.

or even if they didnt remove part of the prouct just the fact they complain seems stpid to me.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

I'm also tired of being called a thief for exercising rights that in any other entertainment medium or physical product is just considered day to day business.

Publishers would love to turn every interaction with a product into a transaction. They'd like it if every time I even thought of their game, money would get siphoned out into their wallet.

But here's the thing, publishers already got their money from the game. Retailers bought their game. Then it's up to those retailers what to do to move their own product. If those retailers think getting themselves their money's worth of their investment in a published material is to resell it, to generate interest in a customer base that would otherwise have no interest in that material (or who otherwise would resort to piracy), then that's their prerogative.

Then those retailers are able, through generating increased interest and revenue from that untapped customer base, to turn these customers into repeat buyers. They might had come for the half price used Heavy Rain, but that moves consoles and hardware, generates interest and hype which generates more sales. Friends tell their friends about the game and so on. Money's moved around the system.

Retailer employees are payed wages to move the product, then they go out and spend on their own games. Life moves on.

But I'm being told that playing into this system, that honestly ultimately moves their product, I'm no better than a thief. That I might as well not owned the game, owned the system, owned the subscription to the networks, none of that.

That, I, as a customer, am not allowed to see the purchase as an investment, I'm not allowed to bargain or purchase intelligently based on my means and my needs. No, I have to buy, buy, buy and take the first and only offer on the table. That only apparently publishers are allowed to play the game of the free market intelligently. The rest of us must just blindly reach out, and grab at whatever random product and just hope to god it's not a pile of crap this time around.

I'm told things like games don't depreciate in value, like a 'real' object does, so they're not comparable to other industries. Which is precisely why the only video game in history is and continues to be pong, because no experience apparently becomes stale. And why everybody uses their perfectly serviceable phones and computers and consoles from 1997.

You know, for an industry that shuffles 4 genres every 10 years (Heavy Rain is completely the same was the FMV games of the early CD capable PC era, or Sega CD games, which is in turn completely the same as the adventure games preceding those, just prettier), it seems disingenuous for you to complain about us selling our used products, when you sold us a used product in the first place.

The only argument I have against your post is the use of the word investment but as you mock the idea of games being sound investments I can let it slide. Never consider a purchase of goods to be an investment unless you have sure knowledge the good in question will increase in value. AKA: raw materials, such as gold or copper, that will need to be purchased to make consumable goods is an investment while the goods the raw material makes, such as electrical components, is not. Consumable goods, such as video games, always decrease in value and hence should never be considered investments.

Agree with you: Nothing wrong with selling a product at going market prices if you want to and those who ***** that you didn't by their, more expensive, version of the same product can just deal with it because we are not listening at all.

Hell, just a thought that popped into my head. By logical conclusion that reselling any good or service is a crime the Stock Market is illegal!
How dare those traders purchase into a company with the intention of selling it later at whatever market price is available at that time!

Caption:
Vol. Havelock

Turn the volume up Haveloxk, I can still hear the game publishers crying.

 

[Alex Mac]

The guy doesn't really have a leg to stand on. That said, I think Heavy Rain was a fine game and would gladly pay the full price for it again.

 

[Princess Rose]

Then what about those that manufacture steel, paper, ink or plastic?
Do they get a cut of it too?

None of those represent intellectual property.

When I buy a book, I'm not interested in the paper it's printed on - I'm interested in the ideas printed on the pages. I'd pay more to send some of my money back to the author of those words, because that's who SHOULD be getting paid.

Same for games, movies, etc.

Cars... well, the design is sort of intellectual property. Since cars aren't "art" I'm less inclined, but YOU, sir, were the one who brought cars into it.

There is no intellectual property involved in steel, paper, ink, or plastic. Those are merely materials. So no, they are absolutely not the same thing.

A game (or a movie, or music) is NOT just a piece of metal and plastic. It's the code contained on that disk. Like the words on a page.

 

[VondeVon]

Well, in my opinion, you lost a lot MORE money by not releasing the game for sale on my console. So. Nyah.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Snipped from the body of one of my replies, as it deserves its own post:

I hate the publishing mentality to begin with. After researching and studying them I found the whole industry to be one of the largest parasites on the market. Writes, musicians, game development... doesn't matter the artist. The publishers will swoop in, pay pennies on royalties, and make money off someone else's idea.

Now don't get me wrong, I understand that they are taking a risk and deserve justified rewards. I understand that the developers and artists might not have the resources needed to get off the ground, in the traditional markets that do require resources to print materials. I simply look at the insane profits these companies are making and have to ask: is the rewards justified by the risks or are they just ripping people off because they have enough resources to bully someone into signing away their intellectual property?

The answer is the latter... they can easily afford to pay a good royalty to the artists but rather focus on their own bottom line to the point they will undertake bully tactics on anyone or thing that threatens even a cent in profit. This whole thread is a case in point, used game markets do not threaten the artists as much as they do the publishers, who wouldn't even give a peep if they where getting their cut and the artists where still being screwed over. However, the publishers bang the table every chance they get not because they are defending the intellectual property, but they are defending their own bottom line.

Banging the table is accurate too: They have no justifiable grounds in a free market to complain about reselling of goods, even intellectual goods, so have to make so much noise people actually believe it is a real problem.

So do not buy into an argument that doesn't come from the artists, aside from a few that get paid off or own a publishing firm and want to protect their duel interests. Purchase second hand, rent games from friends, listen to music pirated from the Internet. Throw some money to the actual artists while you do so, they won't say no to taking your money, and laugh at stupid arguments publishers make to try and shame you into giving your money to them instead.

Not only will this allow you to feel good about yourselves, I understand a few people feel dirty buying second hand, but this will likely give the artist you love more money then they would of got off the original sale. After all, it is every dollar going to that artiest in question and not just whatever pennies in 'royalties' the publisher managed to bully them down to. The donate method is a brilliant way to relieve your mind and to encourage future development of artists you love.

And while your doing that, leave a note suggesting that they look into digital distribution and dump their publishers completely.

Besides, the real fear of the publisher is the Internet itself as they know they are on the chopping block. It is not difficult for any artist of this day and age to get a website, set up a payment program or simply use one of the many on-line financial firms, and run a digital distribution network. Soon all media will be wireless, even books are going that way, and at that point artists won't need massive amounts of income to kick start their carriers... the can do it with a home PC's and 20 bucks a month hosting.