Jimquisition: When The Starscreams Kill Used Games

[TwoSidesOneCoin]

I find the concept of developers saying that used games kills their profits laughable at best by the following, well for a lack of a better word, example:

"You bought a used copy of our game, we lost money on that transaction!"

"Uh.....someone at some point in time bought this new correct?"

"Yeah, so?"

"Well, you already got the money for this game when it was bought brand new earlier on. What seems to be the problem?"

I bet if my friend sold me his copy of "Adventures of X and Y" there is no issue, it seems that developers have an issue when there is a middleman involved that ends up making a profit.

Edit: They tend to forget that we bought and OWNED the copy and decided to do away with it. OWNERSHIP, which sadly you can't really say you have in case of digital games due to EULA.

I have to stop now, or else I'm going to go in circles with my logic and make myself sound more like a dumbass than I already have, just re-reading that shit makes my head hurt! @_@

 

[CyberMachinist]

snip

That does sound logical,most people prefer convenience when it's Hard-work for free stuff vs. Quick and extremely reasonable service, if the Tf2 man-co store is anything to go by(I'm not sure if this was a good example)

I get the feeling I've seen a world like the one you just described from somewhere..... was it a webcomic or something? I don't remember but I got to say if a world like that existed then I imagine we all would have microchips implanted in us and act like those machine-like men from that Apple commercial from the 80's.

Become like the the music industry? Don't tell me they did something like this in the past, I may know about the hey-days of pirating music when it was a big practice but I don't know much after that, kinda before my time, is is still bad?

 

[Arawn]

I've been renting games since the Sega Gensis and Super Nintendo. Video stores probably saw more game rentals than movies since I could barely find any games to rent when I did go. So of course the used game sales would be just as successful. Rather than buy a game out right I learned renting a better way to sample content than playing the demo. If I liked said game I'd purchase it new at another store. So for/to me rental never hurt sells it helped. Sure there were games I didn't buy since they sucked, but is that what they mean? People being more selective in their purchases might have hurt sales. When you buy a game you were pretty much stuck with it. No returns or exchanges. If it's bad, oh well. The only thing you had to go on was the back of package and the short paragraph in a magazine with a number beside it. Before rentals people traded games. My friends an I even went so far as to arrange who got which game for gifts (brought by our parents of course) then traded them back and forth. (NES days) The first place I saw used games sold wasn't GameStop, it was a pawn shop. People selling things to buy new (or used/old) things isn't new. The fact that game prices have gone up plays more of a role in the used game market boom than anything. Games cost alot and we have less money to spend. Buying a cheaper and used version is more appealing than forking over that $60. If we weren't buying from a GameStop it would be from friends or total strangers via Ebay or something. Times had changed, people don't haphazardly purchase anything that comes out. Most games are reviewed weeks before they hit the streets and gamers know if they'll love or hate it already. Problem is like Jim says; the publishers aren't getting the money they WANT for such games. I really can't say how things would be better, but I have a feeling they might get worse soon enough.

 

[gamegod25]

I agree that MS and Sony don't deserve a cut at all and the game industry is the only industry that cares about used sales. I'm just pointing out that the information people are raging about, including Mr Sterling here, is false. MS and Sony are not killing the used game industry, in fact they are barely even wounding it. There will still be people who want to sell their games and people will still be able to buy them.

Except that the current "rumor" about how used games will be handled (the ones that don't just say "no used games, ever", that is) suggests that it's cutting Gamestop out of the picture almost entirely, leaving them with a relatively minimal cut (if anything).

Since Gamestop seems to already be on the boat with this plan I'm guessing they must get some other form of reimbursement otherwise I doubt they could still make a decent profit this way.

Regardless of how much they give back and in what form, there is no way I can support such gamer unfriendly practices. Never before have I NOT wanted a console so much. Before it was just a matter of choosing one or the other because of money limitations or other reasons. Now with every detail that comes out it only pushes me even further into "DO NOT WANT!" territory. I'm still not fully sold on the PS4 but so far its looking like the best option. :/

 

[Strelok]

Ultimately, what the Steam sales are competiting with, isn't even just GoG and self-publishing, but also... piracy.

Steam might have DRM, but it's nor unbreakable. All Steam games can be pirated, and Steam has to make up prices with the knowledge that they are depending on the benevolence of gamers who choose to pay.

Consoles don't have that. With their physical jailbreaking ending warranty and ruining online access, they have managed to kill piracy, so they can ask fr games whatever the hell they want.

It's pretty funny that you think consoles are not pirated, and as a side note you can still go online and get achievements especially on XBox. LOL consoles killed piracy,hilarious.

 

[Lieju]

I can't even remember the last game I rented...

You can still rent games?

(This comment was meant as a joke to emphasize what you said.)

Actually, I don't think I've EVER rented a game, or even seen a place that still does rental...

I get the majority of my games these days for free from a library.
Of course I have to wait for months for the new titles, and many never come to it, but I am a poor university student who spends all her money on food and rent.

 

[Darth_Payn]

STAAAAARRRRRRSCREEEEEAAAAAAAMMMM!!! I knew that weasel had to be involved somehow! His treacherous, greedy, cowardly douchebaggery inspired the current generation of game publishers and console manufacturers. So much so, that their behavior now disgusts him! Well done, Jim! Did you get the idea to call them Starscreams from this?
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheStarscream

 

[irishda]

Not only that but Valve realised that dropping prices down meant a HUGE increase in sales and overall profits. Companies like Microsoft and EA are only looking at the short term gains. They're basically The Once-ler from The Lorax, cutting down the Truffula trees to make a tidy buck right up until the last tree is felled.

Well, it is and it isn't. Dropping the price also means enough people have to buy it to make up the difference. If you drop a $60 game to $5, you need to sell 12 items at the sale price in order to match the profits of just one sale at the original price. So while your sales numbers might sky-rocket, that doesn't necessarily mean your profits have too.

Not to mention it's thing like Steam that's killing the used game industry and controlling second hand sales anyways. This is easily the funniest thing to me. The PC crowd on here will chuckle and laugh at the stupid console gamers for killing an industry that's already pretty much dead on PC, and all because everyone decided to espouse the magic of digital sales over physical media.

 

[Hazy992]

Not only that but Valve realised that dropping prices down meant a HUGE increase in sales and overall profits. Companies like Microsoft and EA are only looking at the short term gains. They're basically The Once-ler from The Lorax, cutting down the Truffula trees to make a tidy buck right up until the last tree is felled.

Well, it is and it isn't. Dropping the price also means enough people have to buy it to make up the difference. If you drop a $60 game to $5, you need to sell 12 items at the sale price in order to match the profits of just one sale at the original price. So while your sales numbers might sky-rocket, that doesn't necessarily mean your profits have too.

That's exactly what I just said. A huge increase in sales meaning an increase in overall profits.

You've just countered what I've said by agreeing with me.

 

[Rednog]

Retailers only getting 1% of the item's worth?
Something sounds incredibly wrong about that kind of figure. Maybe if you're talking about pure profits, basically after they have to pay all their employees and their bills.

Jim specifically said net profit, so yes, after everything else is taken out.

He never said "net profit".
He says "Publishers take the lion's share of new sales to the point where there's almost nothing in it for retailers. Reports vary according to retailer, but I've been informed about two dollars is the average amount the retailer makes off the sale of a new game with the publisher pocketing the rest. In the UK I was told by one GAME manager the sale of a four hundred pound PS3 back in the day netted the store four pounds."
So no he did not specifically say that, to any one who doesn't know it sounds like the publisher is pocketing $58-59 dollars off a new game, which is absolutely not true. He's trying to say that publishers are greedy fucks. But how does stating the net profit of a store justify that? Is it the publishers fault that the upkeep of the business costs a certain amount that the pure profit from the product is low? No. 20-30% of a products value for the store is more than fair, I really haven't heard of any retailers of anything making more than that much of a products value in a sale. So once again I have to ask why is the publisher the greedy bastard in this case? He makes is sound like they're taking 98-99% (especially by calling it the "lion's share") of the money, which is not true because they're following the industry standard...

 

[Darks63]

WHY SEEMINGLY FUCKING nobody cares? serious? drm is bad shit bro, no thing but this? this is fucking freakshow and i am so pissed of that my english-centrer in my brain malfunktiones but if i write german, nobody will understand me.



i dont get it
i dont get it why everybunny whines about the shit microsoft is making because its like tv and drm and bah..-

but THIS shit flews under the radar?

what.
the
fuck.

sorry sir.

Seriously, put the espresso down, go outside and get some fresh air.

Also; Everybunny -snickers- xD

You want to know why no one cares? Because no one is going to buy the damn thing.And it cant do its big brother thing when you toss a towel over it. I would like to see it recognize me or when I smile or go all grumpy cat through my heavy duty Hitch Hikers Guide "Dont Panic" towel.

The only issue I see with your towel plan is if they make it so if the Kinect is obstructed it will interrupt play much like it will if it can't detect a controller. Although a possible counter to that would be to smear petroleum jelly on the lens to make anything it sees really blurry.

 

[kwerboom]

I was always more in favor of video game rental like what BlockBuster was starting to do with games before it went belly up.

Was Blockbuster doing something special with rentals ? Or do you just mean renting games in general.
I think the last time I rented a game was somewhere in the PS1 era, so I'm not sure when it stopped being a thing.

It was 10 years ago, so I don't remember the everything, but yeah, there was a BlockBuster where I lived that had game rentals. Maybe it was just something that happened in fly-over country, but a lot of movie rental stores and grocery stores that did movie rentals had a game rental rack.

And how are Gamestop "twisting the concept of a second hand market" ? You buy something, get your use out of it, then can sell it/trade it in or keep it. Or microwave it, use it as a coaster or a frisbee, pretty much whatever you want to do with it, its yours. They're probably not giving you a great deal, but thats why I don't trade in games (with a few exceptions).

And I don't believe second-hand games are why "developers and customers continue to get burned by the Triple A market".
Bloated budgets for mediocre games with bad marketing and unrealistic targets are much more likely culprits.

GameStop twists the second hand market in my personal opinion by selling used versions of the same product at the exact time that the new product is out. In any other market where there is new and used, the "new" is clearly this year/season/version of the product and the "used" is clearly last year/season/version of the product. At GameStop the "new" and "used" product are from the same version. Someone picking up the "new" version at GameStop transfers money up the supply chain that eventually reaches the developer (hopefully). Someone picking up the "used" version at GameStop just enriches GameStop, which cuts into what developers receive and kills said developers getting the go-a-head to produce more games.

Developers are getting burned by the current system because the demand for success and to make back the initial investment kills funding for meaningful innovation and storytelling while pumping out sequels. Customers are getting burned by the current system because of the $60 or bust price tag that the budgets for the same-y, cookie cutter Triple A games are forced to release with. I'm old enough to remember when a major game release could cost $20 to $30. It took some time to save up allowance money to buy a game, but it was still doable. Looking at the market today, there is the $5 and under app market for smart phones, there is the $5.99 to $20 market for Steam and GOG games, and there is the $60 Triple A market. Between $20 and $50 there is a wasteland that isn't really properly serviced. Lower (and better budgeted) game development by publishers would mean less risky game releases that could allow developers to be more creative. This would lead to a lower price point for some games allowing customers to buy something new for cheaper and not feel the urge to turn around and sell it back again to fund their next purchase. Thus creating a situation where there is new and used of the same product on the rack at the exact same time.

 

[12th_milkshake]

£4 on a ps3? and a couple pounds on new releases? i think thats balls. With your own words publishers bend backwards with all sorts of exclusives for these retailers and then they swallow thoses stupid mark ups? Both these points are counter to the other...

'A Game Manger once told me'

Chirst, theres real journalism.

 

[kwerboom]

Of course, this is just a pipe dream.

They're also ridiculously paranoid about piracy. I mean, you might think they have a point that renting games enables people to make copies and distribute them for free or whatever, which is something that you definitely can't do with a car, but that never stopped blockbuster or iTunes from renting movies to people. They can be ripped by people who know what they're doing and distributed online for free. You can rip a game that you buy at full price just as easily as a game you rent or whatever.

The EC guys talked about a really good idea for a model that I think would work brilliantly. You rent a game for a few days, and, if you like it, all the money you spent on renting that game so far goes to your purchase of a full game, meaning there is no risk at all to the consumer if they decide to rent a game for a while in order to try it. If I put $5 towards trying a game out, I now have to pay $5 less if I decide to buy the game at full price. Everyone gets their money's worth. Everyone's a winner.

I checked and that was Extra Credits Season 5 Episode 6. I agree that was a good idea. Of course the whole reason I said, "this is just a pipe dream" is because no matter how good an idea game rentals are, the paranoia, as you pointed out, in the Triple A market will lead the publishers down the path of self destruction just like the music industry before them. One can either be depressed about not being able to hold a successful intervention or butter up some popcorn and watch the slow motion disaster film unfold.

 

[Strazdas]

Well publishers fear retailers because if retailers together woudl decide to mess with you you may as well close the door and turn off the light. You dont go agasint a authoritarian government and say meh i dont like you so i wont follow your laws.

P.S. do rentals exist? i dont remember last time i saw rental game store, maybe 10 years ago?

when all the monsters are dead you invent new ones, worked for america

 

[Norrdicus]

Bobby Kotick is a piece of crap, he out right said he'd raise the price on SIXTY DOLLAR GAMES?
Is he freaking high?

I'd be okay (not happy, mind you, just okay) with the standard price of a new released video game raising to $70 (or +$10 from current in whatever currency you use), if....

if
IF
IF
IF
IF
IF
IF!!!!!

We could stop all this pre-order bonus DLC and Day 1 DLC bullshit. Of course that's not going to happen, publishers will want to double-dip in any case and nothing can stop them, so at $60 it fucking stays!

 

[Treaos Serrare]

Unless I know I will like the game I always Buy used, very rarely will I take a $60 gamble on something I am unsure of
( Wrath of the white witch is the only one where I did that and I regret it as I find the game to be shit) some of the best gaming can come out of a used game, especially cartridge based games that have on board memory so you see what the poor fool before you did with the game, from ridiculous names and game choices to near end saves to battle a godlike entity with powerhouses then playing through the whole thing to get back to that point, sure sometimes you might stumble upon hardcore pornography but that's the chance you take with life in general

 

[Marohen]

I think there is some fairness in arguing that the absence of used games doesn't harm a platform, since PC is doing fine without it

I don't get this argument I've been seeing as of late. I agree with your overall post, but this argument is something I've been seeing time and time again from the apologists who feel that this is no different from steam and we should just stop our complaining.

It misses the key difference when people buy from steam that the 360 is suffering right now: Steam does not have planned, built-in obsolescence. When I buy from Steam, I can expect those games to work on any computer that can connect and transfer over from steam. No strings attached.

Which is the exact opposite function of the XBone from what I've been seeing. The Xbone's entire modus operandi is that it can't transfer over from another console, that it can't be played anywhere outside the original XBone that decided it would activate it without buying the game again.

And anyone who says that the two are even remotely similar is a fool. A complete, drooling, tumbling fool. I've seen quite a few of these fools the past few days saying that because it's restricting access to all functions of a product aside from the actual product itself, it must be exactly like Steam which is more like a dispenser, a game ATM if you will, that allows one to withdraw games from any point that can connect to it.

Which is why I wish the fanboys would just jolly well shove it.

Your point is correct; moreover, this issue is exacerbated when you realize that--post Xbone launch--Microsoft has less and less reason to actually maintain those 360 servers, so not only is your content non-transferable, but might also evaporate completely.

The core of my claim here is, while I agree with the idea of not having used games in a digital market, the actual practice appears too poorly executed to outweigh the benefits associated with used games.

 

[Alexnader]

Not only that but Valve realised that dropping prices down meant a HUGE increase in sales and overall profits. Companies like Microsoft and EA are only looking at the short term gains. They're basically The Once-ler from The Lorax, cutting down the Truffula trees to make a tidy buck right up until the last tree is felled.

While there's no doubt Valve's steam sales are motivated by competition, it's fairly reasonable to say that a used game market and frequent massive discounts are mutually exclusive. You can't discount a game by 75% on a sale if the next day someone can pass that game to someone else. You don't want people price gouging, you don't want to earn $10 on a sale that would've been $60 when that $10 purchase is passed around to 5 other people.

Of course you can't say that removing the used game market for consoles will lead to bigger discounts, however you can say that putting a used game market into steam would kill steam's discounts.