Is this the real reason Publishers are all up in arms about Used Sales all of a sudden?

[octafish]

So I know people will want a link for proof but I just did some searching:
Before it turned 6, the ps2 had sold 100 million units.
The 360 (which is just turning 6 now) has sold 57 mil.
The ps3 (which is turning 6 in what, another year?) has sold 51 mil.

Ps2 approx sales for first 6 years: 100 million units
360 + ps3 sales for first 6 + 5 years respectively: 57 + 51 million units
= 108 millions units.

There are more console owners in the same relative timespan than last generation... your arguement is flawed.

Man, that XBOX thing must have flopped pretty badly. I would bring up the Dreamcast and GameCube as well, but they did kind of flop.

I must admit this does add an interesting aspect to the whole thing. In a economy built on infinite growth, that isn't much growth at all.

I think it more likely that with the downturn in the global economy, used sales rose, new sales dropped, and publishers saw companies like Gamestop turning a profit that they saw less and less of.

 

[DiamanteGeeza]

It's also probably worth factoring in that the infrastructure wasn't in place back in the PS2 days to easily do anything about used sales - the vast majority of console owners did not have them hooked up to the internet, Xbox Live! was nowhere near as advanced as it is now when it comes to transactions and what the marketplace can do, Sony didn't even really have a comprehensive online component, and a whole lot of people had very crappy internet connections.

So, there wasn't an easy way for publishers to get money from consumers, and there wasn't an easy way for the consumers to get big chunks of content for their money.

Used game sales have always bothered publishers, just as game rentals always have, but in today's world, there's something they can actually do about it.

 

[mjc0961]

There isn't a console that has both good hardware and good support. A certain console requires a fee for online. Another certain console doesn't have any sort of backwards compatibility.

So because Xbox Live Gold costs money, it has bad support? Gold costs because it's such great support in the form of Microsoft going out and partnering with other content providers to bring all kinds of new content options to 360 owners out there. Netflix, Hulu, ESPN, YouTube, and more. These aren't free for Microsoft to just toss in. Sony finds other ways to pay for that content on their platform, but Microsoft adds it to the gold package and asks you to pay for it if you want it. If you don't, whatever. The 360 still plays a vast library of single player games just fine.

And PS3 is bad because it has no BC? Yeah, I miss it too, but buying a new PS2 is insanely cheap and the PS3 also has its own huge library of great games to play now. I swapped out my 60GB PS3 for a slim one without PS2 BC. It's been about a year now and not once have I felt the urge to go back to my PS2 games because the PS3 has more than enough of its own games to play now (I'm sure I'll go back to those PS2 games eventually, because they're good, but modern games are good too if you remember that there's more out there than Call of Duty, Battlefield, and the 50 bajillion other brown military first person shooters). And remember that all models of PS3 will play PS1 games as well.

I know ps3 save files are bigger, but considering ive got save and game files coming upto and even over half a gb it just seems silly and unless i buy a bigger ps3, i dont think i can expand memory, or is there a way?
(yes i know about online memory storage, but i dot have a psn account and im not getting one)

You can put any standard sized 2.5" laptop HDD in your PS3 and vastly increase your storage space. Instructions: http://us.playstation.com/support/answer/index.htm?a_id=362

Way better than last gen's memory cards if you ask me.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

So I know people will want a link for proof but I just did some searching:
Before it turned 6, the ps2 had sold 100 million units.
The 360 (which is just turning 6 now) has sold 57 mil.
The ps3 (which is turning 6 in what, another year?) has sold 51 mil.

Ps2 approx sales for first 6 years: 100 million units
360 + ps3 sales for first 6 + 5 years respectively: 57 + 51 million units
= 108 millions units.

There are more console owners in the same relative timespan than last generation... your arguement is flawed.

Man, that XBOX thing must have flopped pretty badly. I would bring up the Dreamcast and GameCube as well, but they did kind of flop.

I must admit this does add an interesting aspect to the whole thing. In a economy built on infinite growth, that isn't much growth at all.

I think it more likely that with the downturn in the global economy, used sales rose, new sales dropped, and publishers saw companies like Gamestop turning a profit that they saw less and less of.

Off the top of my head, the Xbox sold something like 24 million units, and the gamecube sold 21 million units. I dont really know where they fit into the time span but you've also got to remember 88 million in Wii sales, 150 million Nintendo DS sales (compared with 80 million GBA sales) and 70 million PSP sales. Theres actually alot more tech in peoples homes compared to last gen. Not forgetting Ipods, Iphones and a revival of PC gaming on steam.

 

[The_Waspman]

Actually, consoles last generation weren't really that cheap. Wasn't the ps2 like, 300 quid when it was first released? And I distinctly remember some ps2 titles selling new for about sixty, so current gteneration games are actually cheaper, especially when you take into account things like inflation.

As an employee of a game retailer in the UK, I'll be honest, its crammed down our throats to try and push preowned, which I personally find ridiculous. Especially considering the state of some games that people try to trade in. Scratched discs, crushed boxes, drinking having been spilt all over them, people just dont seem to respect their games.

 

[GonzoGamer]

Hmm... Interesting. That certainly is a possibility, but can you please provide the sources for all the statistics? I don't whether you made up these numbers or not at this point.

I don't know if you're joking or not. I explained above.
Seriously, just google it, look on wikipedia, or any of the 100 other sites this info is on. It's really not hard to find the sales figures.
Just go to the wikipedia pages for these consoles and you'll see the figures.

Mate, I'm just going to lay this out. If you come into a forum with a point to make, have the decency to back it up. You've just made yourself look lazy and elitist with what you said up there. Lazy, in that you didn't provide a source for your numbers. Elitist, in that what you wrote has the tone of "I'm far too important to do the important stuff in a forum, that's up to you peasants to do!"
And in case you haven't heard, Wikipedia isn't a reliable source. It is often the first place to go to get information about something, yes, but it shouldn't be trusted as a source when used alone.

Yes but I said in my original post that these figures are all over the place: not hard to find.
I agree that Wikipedia is sometimes full of shit which is why I didn't believe my friend when he mentioned this fact to me but when I checked a couple of other sites, I found it right.

I just figure that the type of person who would click on the multitude of links I would need to post to prove this would have little problem going to google, wikipedia, or anyplace else with the info.

And how am I elitist, I did the research. I could say you're being elitist by saying "I'm too important to do all this research myself; you do it for me. No, not on Wikipedia, find another site."

But we're going off topic, I assure you, this isn't bullshit. What's you're opinion on the actual subject?

 

[GonzoGamer]

So because Xbox Live Gold costs money, it has bad support? Gold costs because it's such great support in the form of Microsoft going out and partnering with other content providers to bring all kinds of new content options to 360 owners out there. Netflix, Hulu, ESPN, YouTube, and more. These aren't free for Microsoft to just toss in. Sony finds other ways to pay for that content on their platform, but Microsoft adds it to the gold package and asks you to pay for it if you want it. If you don't, whatever. The 360 still plays a vast library of single player games just fine.

And PS3 is bad because it has no BC? Yeah, I miss it too, but buying a new PS2 is insanely cheap and the PS3 also has its own huge library of great games to play now. I swapped out my 60GB PS3 for a slim one without PS2 BC. It's been about a year now and not once have I felt the urge to go back to my PS2 games because the PS3 has more than enough of its own games to play now (I'm sure I'll go back to those PS2 games eventually, because they're good, but modern games are good too if you remember that there's more out there than Call of Duty, Battlefield, and the 50 bajillion other brown military first person shooters). And remember that all models of PS3 will play PS1 games as well.

I know ps3 save files are bigger, but considering ive got save and game files coming upto and even over half a gb it just seems silly and unless i buy a bigger ps3, i dont think i can expand memory, or is there a way?
(yes i know about online memory storage, but i dot have a psn account and im not getting one)

You can put any standard sized 2.5" laptop HDD in your PS3 and vastly increase your storage space. Instructions: http://us.playstation.com/support/answer/index.htm?a_id=362

Way better than last gen's memory cards if you ask me.

Well, if you want me to spell it out (I didn't want to turn this into a flamewar but the convo is well under way by now), what I meant was that the ps3 is a well built console with terrible support (both from Sony and publishers) while the 360 has good support but the hardware is crap (maybe better now but they were bricking at a rate of 50% at one point).
I took good care of my ps2 so the BC didn't bother me but I know people personally who have a ps2 but nevergot a ps3 and that's actually a big reason.
When I found out about this I went around to friends and family who have a ps2 but no ps3 or 360, many of them cited extra fees and lacking features like BC; one friend in particular was really angry about that one.

 

[ElPatron]

Consoles this Gen are a far bit more expensive than they were last time around though

No they are not.

1993: Atari Jaguar - $249
1995: Sega Saturn - $399
1995: PlayStation - $299

2000: PlayStation 2 - $299

2001: Xbox - $299
2005: Xbox 360 - $299 / $399

 

[GonzoGamer]

Hmm... Interesting. That certainly is a possibility, but can you please provide the sources for all the statistics? I don't whether you made up these numbers or not at this point.

I don't know if you're joking or not. I explained above.
Seriously, just google it, look on wikipedia, or any of the 100 other sites this info is on. It's really not hard to find the sales figures.
Just go to the wikipedia pages for these consoles and you'll see the figures.

Hey, it is the responsibility of the one making the claims to provide the data to back it up. I should not have to look up the data myself to prove if your data is correct or not. That is just how arguments/debate works.

That's the thing, the point of this thread isn't to debate or argue. Just trying to get people's feelings on this and how/if it's affected the way Publishers sell us games. The important part isn't the figures, it's what you think they say about the industry right now.
Honestly people if these were obscure figures that were hard to find, I would (and have in the past) provided the link but this is something you can literally find anywhere. It's not the map to the City of Gold, it's console sales figures.
And even if I did give links, others have proven here that if I put links from wikipedia, people would call BS and if I used VGch, others would've called BS.

 

[GonzoGamer]

So I know people will want a link for proof but I just did some searching:
Before it turned 6, the ps2 had sold 100 million units.
The 360 (which is just turning 6 now) has sold 57 mil.
The ps3 (which is turning 6 in what, another year?) has sold 51 mil.

Ps2 approx sales for first 6 years: 100 million units
360 + ps3 sales for first 6 + 5 years respectively: 57 + 51 million units
= 108 millions units.

There are more console owners in the same relative timespan than last generation... your arguement is flawed.

Not really because I'm only comparing them both against 1 console from last gen. The most popular one sure, but still, you have to admit, that's a huge difference.

 

[Braxton]

The only thing I don't agree with in the OP is this one statement.....

A lot of the AAA games that publishers try and bully people into buying new copies of

I've heard it a few times from people saying they feel "bullied" into buying games.

Do publishers employees come round to peoples houses and beat them until they buy?

No?

So basically people still have the same choices to buy or not to buy?

So they are not being bullied in any way, shape or form. They are under no pressure at all to buy any games. It is purely their choice whether they buy a game no matter if it's new or used.

I just don't understand where this "pressure" to buy is people talk about. I've purchased 2 games so far this year. Space Marine and Deus Ex. The only other games i'm buying are Skyrim and ToR. I felt no pressure to buy them they are games i've wanted and been waiting for.

Unless EA come round to house and take a baseball bat to my kneecaps for not buying Battlefield 3 i'm not seeing any "bullying" or "pressure".

I would argue that he's referring to yearly Sequels like Madden or CoD. If you play multiplayer, a majority of the online crowd will migrate to the next game and you "have to" in order to stay current. All it takes is one of your friends to upgrade -_-.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

I'm not too sure of your theory, to be honest. I'd have attributed the advent of digital distribution to this, as opposed to an (alleged) decrease in the sale of consoles this generation. It would make much more sense that the publishers are more afraid of possible redundancy (how many devs do you think will bother put up with their sh*t if they can sell their games at half the production cost online?) than a tiny decrease in console sales.

 

[RikuoAmero]

Hmm... Interesting. That certainly is a possibility, but can you please provide the sources for all the statistics? I don't whether you made up these numbers or not at this point.

I don't know if you're joking or not. I explained above.
Seriously, just google it, look on wikipedia, or any of the 100 other sites this info is on. It's really not hard to find the sales figures.
Just go to the wikipedia pages for these consoles and you'll see the figures.

Mate, I'm just going to lay this out. If you come into a forum with a point to make, have the decency to back it up. You've just made yourself look lazy and elitist with what you said up there. Lazy, in that you didn't provide a source for your numbers. Elitist, in that what you wrote has the tone of "I'm far too important to do the important stuff in a forum, that's up to you peasants to do!"
And in case you haven't heard, Wikipedia isn't a reliable source. It is often the first place to go to get information about something, yes, but it shouldn't be trusted as a source when used alone.

Yes but I said in my original post that these figures are all over the place: not hard to find.
I agree that Wikipedia is sometimes full of shit which is why I didn't believe my friend when he mentioned this fact to me but when I checked a couple of other sites, I found it right.

I just figure that the type of person who would click on the multitude of links I would need to post to prove this would have little problem going to google, wikipedia, or anyplace else with the info.

And how am I elitist, I did the research. I could say you're being elitist by saying "I'm too important to do all this research myself; you do it for me. No, not on Wikipedia, find another site."

But we're going off topic, I assure you, this isn't bullshit. What's you're opinion on the actual subject?

Sigh...it doesn't matter how hard or easy the links are to find...you're coming here, saying something, you want to put your point across, then put up the links yourself. I don't want to have to go to Wikipedia myself and look for something that proves your point. What if I disagree with you, and because I disagree, I don't go looking for your evidence?
You say you did research...then Back. It. Up. BreakfastMan said he doesn't know whether you made the numbers up or not. Given the open nature of Wikipedia, you could have edited that page yourself...see why I said to not rely on Wikipedia alone? And why should I do YOUR research? You want me to see your point of view about something, then show me some evidence. Do not, and I mean, do not ever tell the other person to do the research themselves.

 

[mayney93]

Because theres a chance they can make more money out of it, simple as

 

[Chelsea O'shea]

Well it could just be me, but the consoles were cheaper, more reliable and had better games on the last generation, so is it any surprise that this generation isnt doing as well?

Ignoring people who just hate older games cause they have worse graphics or are old cause really thats just a silly stance to take, i know a lot of people who think this generation is weaker than the last in terms of games, sure they look bigger and better than ever, but theyre also more expensive and are shorter so less play for your buck.

Actually one issue ive had lately, cause i picked up a 40gb ps3 on the cheap, is that its full with less than a dozen games installed, i have 4 ps2 memory cards and thats enough for over 50 ps2 games while been less memory and even with much more files.
I know ps3 save files are bigger, but considering ive got save and game files coming upto and even over half a gb it just seems silly and unless i buy a bigger ps3, i dont think i can expand memory, or is there a way?
(yes i know about online memory storage, but i dot have a psn account and im not getting one)

possible flaw in your argument:are you installing all your games?if so that is taking up WAAAAAAY more space then the simple ps2 game save,2nd while last gen had some gems,it also had alot of crap and just plain unplayable games,and this gens game are not all shorter,in fact many of this gens rpgs are longer(if less stat based) and the stories this gen are more engaging for the most part,yes there is still a large pile of shit games but that happens every generation.

ot: i can see your logic but it isn't as absolute as you make it seem and while counting both of the big ones this gen you ignored the sales of the original xbox

 

[Rawne1980]

Snipped for space saving because I tend to waffle a lot and rarely make any sense anyway. (thats aimed at me because it's my quote nobody else)

I would argue that he's referring to yearly Sequels like Madden or CoD. If you play multiplayer, a majority of the online crowd will migrate to the next game and you "have to" in order to stay current. All it takes is one of your friends to upgrade -_-.

In that case i'll wind my neck in. That makes sense.

It's just i've heard it a few times but just struggled to wrap my head around the "bullied" part of some peoples arguments.

With regards to regularly updated sports and shooter games I can understand why people feel they have to buy them to keep up to date with multiplayer and such like. I mean they do still have a choice about whether to buy it or not just not much of a choice.

Either they play a dead multiplayer or the update to get online with others.

Yep, that I can understand. And with that I withdraw my initial statement as being a little bit wrong.

I apologise.

 

[Rawne1980]

Snippety snip

Which makes it great if you want to give a concussion or something. However, if you want to break a kneecap, you need to do it with a flatter, heavier surface. There, the kneecap won't just break, it'll shatter - far more painful.

I'm quite worried about you.

Thats a bit of knowledge about kneecapping you have there.

Remind me never to piss you off.

 

[ph0b0s123]

A lot of the AAA games that publishers try and bully people into buying new copies of

I've heard it a few times from people saying they feel "bullied" into buying games.

Do publishers employees come round to peoples houses and beat them until they buy?

No?

So basically people still have the same choices to buy or not to buy?

So they are not being bullied in any way, shape or form. They are under no pressure at all to buy any games. It is purely their choice whether they buy a game no matter if it's new or used.

I just don't understand where this "pressure" to buy is people talk about. I've purchased 2 games so far this year. Space Marine and Deus Ex. The only other games i'm buying are Skyrim and ToR. I felt no pressure to buy them they are games i've wanted and been waiting for.

Unless EA come round to house and take a baseball bat to my kneecaps for not buying Battlefield 3 i'm not seeing any "bullying" or "pressure".

Please read the comment better, he said bullied into buying NEW games. Not into buying games in general. I.E being pushed to buy new rather than used.

But sure mis-read the sentence and start ranting by all means.

O/T Interesting numbers. The consoles golden age is behind us?

 

[JediMB]

Here's an idea...

Publishers are fighting used games more aggressively now because of two factors:

1) GameStop and the like are marketing used games more aggressively.

2) They can.