Jimquisition: Online Passes Are Bad For Everybody

[Sylocat]

It's not more than they're getting from the online pass, though. That's earning them ten dollars per game that has it, more or less, because most people that buy the games that have online passes want to play multiplayer. Hence, it's the same solution they're already trying, just without involving Gamestop and possibly being applicable to non-online games.

I meant, it's more than they're getting if they aren't switching to this stupid online pass system that really needs to die.

Besides, given how huge a cut GameStop takes of the used game sales, I don't think it would be that difficult to get 10 and still make it cheaper. Especially if, like Amazon z-shops, the clients swallow the shipping costs.

The other unstated problem with this proposal is that it potentially puts Gamestop out of business, which is unquestionably BAD for developers, who rely on them to move a large portion of their new products.

As long as GameStop is relied upon to move "a large portion" of their new products, they won't go out of business, because they'll still be doing that. Providing a cheaper alternative to their USED game sales, however, might force them to drop their price-gouging a bit (and make no mistake, they are pulling a HUGE profit margin off their used-game sales, they're in no danger of going out of business if they play a little more fair).

 

[XDravond]

I agree a lot on these "points" what is best?
Small "loss" (it's not really a loss it's a non income) but happy gamers and lots of them and some fans liking the game to buy the next one witch turns in to profit in the long run
or
Profit that will turn out after a few years to HUGE fracking losses, angry gamers, and not to many daring to try the "new" IP game...

I know what I would choose but then again everyone knows "gamers" are the smartest and knows everything (well not really but we're the customers and they are supposed to "prove them self worthy" to us not the opposite)

 

[Rednog]

Meh as a PC gamer this really doesn't affect me at all, we don't get used games, and we've been imputing codes in order to play our games for how long?

 

[TheDooD]

Also, now that I'm thinking about it, I may be jaded by the whole "used game" arguments because I'm a PC gamer, and digital distribution is the way to go.

People say that they can't afford to buy a game new, so they wait and buy it used.

I say I can't afford to buy a game new, so I wait and buy it on a Steam/Gamer's Gate sale for 10-30% of its original price (seriously, I got Dragon Age, it's expansion, and all the DLC for $20). Since I'm buying new, I'm a customer of the publishers and developers, and since I'm willing to wait for a sale, I'm not selling organs to fuel my gaming habit.

So anytime someone says they "can't afford" a new game so they buy used, I naturally scoff, but maybe things are different on consoles.

Yea its different on consoles normally for a game to be reduced in price it either has to be out for a long time and normally by then used copies are cheaper. Or the old method where the really popular games got the greatest hits tag and where sold for 20 bucks. I have no idea how you don't know this. If publishers had sells on all left over and not so new hard copies most notably during the summer they can make some money, yet they don't do this. So gamers have to wait for used sells. It's like Steam's method yet its second hand game, some people look at it like dirt but the price drop is pretty much the same.

 

[Azuaron]

If I pay you for product, I want all the motherfucking services that are supposed to come with it hassle free. I too miss the cartridge, pick up and just play days.

This whole scheme gets me angry too.

But that's the thing: you aren't paying them (the publishers), you're paying Gamestop. If you pay Gamestop and want your game to have online play, complain to Gamestop and leave the publishers alone: you are not their customer, don't try and act like one.

 

[Nurb]

I'm surprised that he hasn't pointed out that there is NO OTHER INDUSTRY that feels entitled to more money when a customer resells their product.

Shit, that's like companies demanding a cut of the sales from ebay.

except the games industry is like no other.

when you buy a used car it has wear and tear. A game does not. (if a used game has wear and tear generally it's painstakingly obvious. But trying telling whether or not the headgasket on the used car you have bought doesn't have a crack in it. That's going to break in a month.

You don't buy a car drive it to Mcdonalds then decide you want a new car. take it down to the lot you just bought the thing from slap a 10% discount on it and sell it. It simply doesn't work that way.

The only other industries that have even a comparable product to games are DVD's and Music CD's. Most of which when you buy you don't resell. And if you do you resell them yourself. They aren't being sold next to brand new copies of the same product the very next day.

I think that the companies would have no issue if used game trading was done through thing's like Ebay and the like, and not in the exact same location as their own products are being sold.

At least with Ebay and the like, their are negatives to buying a used copy maybe you have to wait for shipping. You need to ensure it's not a scam etc etc. But there is no negative to buying a used copy in the same store as the new one which is the issue used gaming doesn't have to be just for the poor it's for anyone who wants to buy the used copies over the un-used one and in some cases the only way people will ever buy a new copy of the game is if their isn't a used copy sitting right next to it for 5 dollars less

The used car market is the closest you can get, and there's no car company throwing a tantrum about how used cars are "stealing money" from them when people don't want to spend the money on a brand new version, which is what one of these publishers said about the used game market, that it's basically stealing from them.

-You make a product
-You sell a product to a customer
-You have no further rights to money no matter what the customer does with it.

This is pretty much accepted by everyone else and a gamng companies need to stop whining about it.

 

[veloper]

Online passes devaluating both used sales AND new sales?

That's more like wishful thinking rather than a real issue, Jim.

Used sales have been killed on the PC with DRM and new games still cost $50 and with some big publishers the prices have actually gone up to $60.
Even if it would happen, that's cheaper new games and more people buying passes or new games and not just a small minority supporting the whole game industry. I wish.

The only point sofar that stands, is the hassle involved.

 

[Sylocat]

I'm surprised that he hasn't pointed out that there is NO OTHER INDUSTRY that feels entitled to more money when a customer resells their product.

Shit, that's like companies demanding a cut of the sales from ebay.

There's no other industry where CONSUMERS feel entitled to buy a much cheaper used product that is functionally identical to the original.

When you buy a used car, you are accepting that there will be a certain amount of wear and tear, and thus some decreased functionality. When you buy a used book, you are risking page damage. A used VHS will have degraded some, a used DVD will probably have scratches and scuffs. Consumers don't care, or at least they don't blame the manufacturer.

But used games? When you play online, you are using the PUBLISHER's bandwidth. Bandwidth costs money. If you don't pay for the game, you are stealing money from them. Even the tired pirate argument of, "DURR, THEY DONT LOOZE ANY MUNNY FROM PIRACY, LOL!" doesn't apply, because you are costing them money for bandwidth.

 

[Frostbite3789]

You know what hurts the game industry even more than online passes? Cheap people who wait a month after a game comes out just to get a used copy of a game, thus giving all their money to Gamestop, and not the creators or publishers of the game.

"Oh no, I can't play this shitty multiplayer without putting in a code. Oh woe is me."

Yes, because everyone can easily afford to pay for every game they want new before the price drop or before used ones start appearing.

Whoops, sorry, I didn't mean yes. I meant no, no way, and if you can then you are very much in the minority and you shouldn't be blaming others for having less money than you.

If they can afford the $55 that GameStop sells used games for, for 3+ months after the game comes out, they can drop the extra $5 easily. They aren't that poor, clearly.

They could also be patient and wait for a sale, because every week, every retailer has sales. And games are involved in these sales 95% of the time. Guess what? These sales usually put the game at below the $55 price tag you're paying for a new release used game at GameStop. Logic'd.

 

[hitheremynameisbob]

I meant, it's more than they're getting if they aren't switching to this stupid online pass system that really needs to die.

Besides, given how huge a cut GameStop takes of the used game sales, I don't think it would be that difficult to get 10 and still make it cheaper. Especially if, like Amazon z-shops, the clients swallow the shipping costs.

As long as GameStop is relied upon to move "a large portion" of their new products, they won't go out of business, because they'll still be doing that. Providing a cheaper alternative to their USED game sales, however, might force them to drop their price-gouging a bit (and make no mistake, they are pulling a HUGE profit margin off their used-game sales, they're in no danger of going out of business if they play a little more fair).

Then let's address the other competitor to this proposal: Ebay. You're going to face stiff competition from Ebay here because you're trying to skim something off the top. Forget ten dollars - nobody's going to pay ten dollars more for a used game than they'd have to pay on Ebay. Or, if you embed that charge into the price without raising it, nobody is going to want to SELL their game on this service, because they'll be making ten dollars less than they would on Ebay.

I think you're underestimating how much of Gamestop's business is based on used sales at this point. If you take them away, maybe they don't go out of business, but at the very least they'll be closing a significant number of stores. Hell, could they even justify stores any more? Think of how much shelf space your local Gamestop uses for used games. About 70% here. Less locations means less convenience for consumers and fewer impulse buys. It means less ability to compete with stores that haven't based their business model on used games like Target, Best Buy, and Walmart. Overall, it likely means fewer places to buy games, which isn't a good thing for developers.

 

[Mister Linton]

The jewelery business is completely dead due to pawn shops. They make no money whatsoever. Didn't you hear? That entire industry went under. If only they had found a way to screw with their paying customers, they may have been able to save themselves. Why would anyone buy new jewelery when used (stolen) jewelery at a pawn shop is cheaper. Oh, right...

Jim's first point is right on. If I could never ever trade in my games, I would be forced to buy far fewer new and used. Guess who loses on that deal: all the game new publishers who aren't making AAA titles.

Anyone else remember Nintendo trying to sue Blockbuster because they thought game rentals would drive them out of business?

 

[Frostbite3789]

I just don't understand why people are so against used games. The pump money into the industry and courts have upheld time and time again that we have the right to sell our licensed product to others. The publishers not seeing any money dosen't hold up either, because EVERY used game anywhere ever, was once a new game that was purchased.

They're money grubbing bastards that can careless about a happy fan base compared to lining their pockets with more money they'll never spend because they're afraid of taking risks. The funny thing is that Gamestop and other places that sell used games uses the money from said games to buy newer games, stock all those nice things gamers want and publishers want sold as well. They love gamestop when they're stocking their NEW stuff but wants them to burn in napalm the moment something used of theirs is for sell.

Have you been to a GameStop lately? Their new game selection is terrible. I find more new games at my local Best Buy, Target and Walmart.

Hell, not a single GameStop within 40 miles of me got Demon's Souls in for 3-4 weeks after it was released in the States. I know, because I checked back frequently and they eventually said they'd inform of when they got it in stock. I already had it of course, because flipping Super Target got in Demon's Souls before a store dedicated ENTIRELY TO GAMING.

Also they're refusal to carry more than 15 PC games makes me want to punch walls. Why would they? No ability to resell those.

 

[hipster666]

They could set up a part of their website specifically devoted to trade-ins. Players could sell used copies of the game to one another, using the publisher themselves as the middle-men, and the publisher would get some money out of the deal.

The advantage to doing this over GameStop would be that the publishers wouldn't have to take nearly as big of a cut of each transaction in order to stay in business, so the seller gets more, the buyer pays less, and everyone goes home with more money in their pocket.

As an added bonus, you could also do this with serial numbers. Any used copy directly processed through the publisher's website would have the serial number automatically "reset" with no extra steps necessary... and any used copy sold through a third-party like GameStop would have to be called-in and processed (requiring proof of purchase, &c.). Even if you didn't charge any extra money for the serial number thing, the sheer CONVENIENCE of it would be a drawing point.

I agree. It can't be THAT hard to come up with an amicable solution can it? I was thinking something more along the lines of movies where every period they drop the price, getting maximum cash from the must-haves, decent cash from the wants and then cleaning up whatever is left with the bargain hunters. Every six months would be adequate I think to seperate the buyer types and would mean you could cut out the shops altogether.

An addition like a trade-in shop would allow something e-Bay like with each publisher allowing them to cream off 1% of any transaction fees while allowing others to trade out their title and another to trade in for earlier access.

This can't be that hard!

 

[-Dragmire-]

Man, remember the (short lived) days when you could go to a flea market and barter for used snes games and no one gave a damn? Those were the days...

I still collect pre PS2 era games and I don't order online, what's the problem paying for old used games?

I don't trade in any games, I'm a collector.

 

[TheDooD]

If they really cared that gamestop makes them money then why in the hell do they want them gone and why are they treating people who's still spending money like they're common thieves. I'm not playing the straw man I'm stating my own opinion because like quite a few people I know they can't buy every game and are pretty much forced to buy used and share accounts.

You think developers want Gamestop GONE? What on Earth are you basing that on? If they wanted Gamestop gone they'd just stop selling their games to them. You are using a straw man because you're claiming that developers are making an argument that they aren't. They like Gamestop in general because without Gamestop they'd lose a huge portion of their new game sales. They NEED Gamestop. If they didn't, they'd have stopped using Gamestop to distribute their games a long time ago. How developers treat us is irrelevant to this discussion. I don't like it any more than you do, but you're saying that developers don't recognize that Gamestop makes them money. They obviously do.

They just also claim that they'd make more money if Gamestop would stop selling used games.

They only real way they would make more money if games didn't cost $60+ and if they changed the base price to what was in that used game range of 10-45$. Yet most likely you know most Publishers aren't gonna fly with that at all. So when publishers as a collective decide to lower prices they're just gonna have to live with the fact is used games are here to stay and they kinda need to realize they're pretty much the reason why people go for used games as well. Think about the Holiday torrent of games that come out days apart if not on the same day. All said games been hyped all year and they know people want to buy them yet most can only buy 1-3 new while most are gonna wait till January for a used copy or wait until summer when its really cheap. Once they treat us better they'll get treated better simple as that. Most people aren't gonna to just deal with the bullshit.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

That last part really stood out for me. Publishers are treating me like a fucking criminal until I prove otherwise and after that they still are suspicious of me so they have DRM. I don't have to be treated like this. Niche devs like Atlus and NIS are happy to take my money and treat me like a paying customer.

 

[qeinar]

well if people buy used games the publisher don't really get any cash from those.. (even though jim argued they'd get some when the sequel game comes out)

I'm for online passes. ^^ never really sold any of my games to some store eighter, and games in norway costs abot 100-120 USD new.

 

[Nurb]

I'm surprised that he hasn't pointed out that there is NO OTHER INDUSTRY that feels entitled to more money when a customer resells their product.

Shit, that's like companies demanding a cut of the sales from ebay.

There's no other industry where CONSUMERS feel entitled to buy a much cheaper used product that is functionally identical to the original.

When you buy a used car, you are accepting that there will be a certain amount of wear and tear, and thus some decreased functionality. When you buy a used book, you are risking page damage. A used VHS will have degraded some, a used DVD will probably have scratches and scuffs. Consumers don't care, or at least they don't blame the manufacturer.

But used games? When you play online, you are using the PUBLISHER's bandwidth. Bandwidth costs money. If you don't pay for the game, you are stealing money from them. Even the tired pirate argument of, "DURR, THEY DONT LOOZE ANY MUNNY FROM PIRACY, LOL!" doesn't apply, because you are costing them money for bandwidth.

Did you ever play the original xbox with LIVE? None of the publishers nor microsoft got all bitchy when used games could access the same content, patches and multiplayer as original owners.

It's only recently they're getting more whiney about the subject because they feel like nickle and diming customers in a new way. Wether it's been stopping expansion packs and charge for individual digital content, stopping dedicated servers, or day one DLC, they've always had to roll out the "PIRACY AND EVIL USED GAMES" bullshit so people will put up with it.

 

[hitheremynameisbob]

They only real way they would make more money if games didn't cost $60+ and if they changed the base price to what was in that used game range of 10-45$. Yet most likely you know most Publishers aren't gonna fly with that at all. So when publishers as a collective decide to lower prices they're just gonna have to live with the fact is used games are here to stay and they kinda need to realize they're pretty much the reason why people go for used games as well. Think about the Holiday torrent of games that come out days apart if not on the same day. All said games been hyped all year and they know people want to buy them yet most can only buy 1-3 new while most are gonna wait till January for a used copy or wait until summer when its really cheap. Once they treat us better they'll get treated better simple as that. Most people aren't gonna to just deal with the bullshit.

That's fine, I agree that the way developers and publishers treat their customers, by and large, sucks. It's true that they set themselves up for some used game sales by releasing games on the schedule they do. I never said anything to the contrary. The problem is that you were claiming that these people want Gamestop to go out of business (or something), which is just absolutely wrong.