Total Biscuit vs the Jimquisition

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Total Biscuit is just wrong. First of all, not everyone can afford all the new games at retail price. And not everywhere is used games price just $10 lower than the new one. I bought half of my PS3 games used for $30. And I liked some of them enough to want to buy the next one as soon as it comes out. That's what's so great about used games. You buy them at a cheaper price and if you end up liking it you may consider buying the sequel as soon as it's out. Without the ability to buy used games I think I'll just wait for the price to drop and I'll be a lot more careful with my purchases. Or I may not even use a console anymore. I am primarily a PC gamer as it is, and I mostly buy lots of games during Steam sales.

 

[Eve Charm]

Steam has one thing that MS and Sony won't when they do away with used game sales, Competition. Steam as GOG, Desura, Green man gaming, amazon selling steam codes, the devs themselves selling steam codes and finally you have things like humble, indie royal, gala and such selling the games dirt cheap also. Even given the choice at least MS said they don't want the Competition when they can have a monopoly not supporting indies and letting them self publish.

While we are seeing this now since the current consoles basically announced were done once they announced the new ones, A few months ago, Bad games were coming out still full price. It's not like they didn't know Aliens CM and star trek were Horrid games, Review embargo and all but still 60 dollars for games not worth anywhere near the price. 5-10 games coming out a week against maybe one or two if were lucky? ya steam needs to do sales, some games need to do sales. You can be a cheap PC gamer but you can't be a cheap Console gamer. Devs and Publishers can just as easily say " here's 10 bucks off if you preordered our physical copy" as much as digital.

Lets not forget Publishers and Devs made their monster. Eb, funcoland, baggage. software ect and what not weren't all Gamestop, They failed and merged into one company, or failed and died off. You can't make money selling and stocking all the hottest and even niche titles and make a profit JUST with new. You can't make enough to pay the workers and pay the rent, and you obviously can't charge more for the product or you won't get any business. Used is a Risky business and with even the big powerhouse gamestop shutting down stores you can see it isn't as profitable as they'd like you to believe. Risky is better then giving up though and that's why Best buy and toys 'r' us have been trying it out.

 

[StrangerQ]

I find that we as the consumers stand in the bland grey area, covered in meat and surrounded by bears and bear size wolves.

 

[BrotherRool]

I understand both sides of the argument, I come down in favour of Jim's view though.
It works on PC because Microsoft has a fairly hands off approach and hasn't done anything to restrict digital distribution so we have competition.

^This is probably the answer. There's competition on a PC so if Steam doesn't sell particularly old games cheaply, GoG will sell them instead and Steam can match the price or lose sales. That can't happen on a console so we need some other market keeping them honest

 

[IllumInaTIma]

I do believe that both Jim and John have valid points, and, essentially, both of them are speculating since they don't have strong statistical proof. However, Jim is not trying to be a complete asshole about it! Now, I love TB, I love his videos and I often agree with him, but the way he behaved on Twitter and in his video was akin to some kid plugging his ears and screaming "LALALA! YOU ARE MORONS I CAN'T HEAR YOU! LALALA!". He then proceeded to copy responses given to him on Twitter and boasting about number of subscribers lost and earned like it was some kind of dick measuring contest. Not classy. So, yeah, thank God for Jim.

 

[Negatempest]

I'll copy and paste here what I put down else where.

Because a person doesn't need to hear a hate speech from a Neo-Nazi to know that most of what he says is BS?

Point being that just because we don't hear the thousands of "points" of why something is bad, does not make it bad. Here is some strong points for used games that us easily over-looked. Steam does actually have competition if you noticed sites like GoG that have no DRM in it. Competition on sales tends to breed good sales. Microsoft has an extremely poor history of doing something for the benefit of the customer. So don't believe for a second that the "Poor Developers" speech they give isn't to hide the fact that they want more money and monopolize the market...again. Used games is a necessary evil like the Union. It's not perfect and the developers may or may not lose money. But that keeps Publishers like Microsoft from controlling how, when and under what condition a game can be played.

 

[Holythirteen]

I wish I could watch a debate between these two, maybe give them a couple nerf bats if there's a tie...

I gotta side with Jim here though, I mean, I totally agreed with TB, he thinks devs should get more money for their work (they made the damn game after all), while Jim thinks Gamestop should get more than $2-5 for every sold game(not sure how any business could survive on that). But let's face it, the PC game market is a different animal than the console game market. PC games were already cheaper when they married the pass-key online activation system. If we give console game publishers the same control over their games I highly doubt they would lower prices. With them it's a one-way street, you can't go through steam or GOG or the devs themselves, they want it all because they spent millions on advertising.

Meh, its hard to take TotalBiscuit seriously on this issue when right at the start of the video he says something to the effect of "not sure why console gamers care what I think they aren't an audience I care about", he makes it sound like he's written off the console market but that doesn't stop him from going on for half an hour about why the pc market is so much better.

I don't think any families will starve to death if consoles suffer a massive consumer backlash, in fact, I think publishers need a wake up call to help them understand exactly why the market works the way it does. They did a fair job at building up the video game industry and inspiring customer loyalty over the past 30 years, but they seem to think that entitles them to a free ride.

Edit:

server costs, relates to that DLC thing. You know what's good for any online game? An active community. You know what online passes kill?

I interpreted his comments more like: "the number of games being played online may be the same but the publisher didn't expect people to play multiplayer so much and it was because buyers were selling the games back, what jerks" and I'm thinking: "So they knew it was a crap mode that offered no real replay value and they're upset that the consumer realized this and sold it to some other schmuck? Good argument."

 

[The AmeriCanadian Gamer]

It is nice to hear the view from the other side, but as much as I love TB a lot of his arguments don't hold much water imo. But this is the way I see used games. - They are going to disappear. Whether we like it or not. One day physical copies will no longer exist and the used games market will fall into obscurity. What I don't like is how used games are viewed. As this malevolent entity that wants to take all the monies and roll around in them. Maybe devs/publishers should adapt to the market rather than attacking it.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

my take on it.

my son, his main supply of games is; used old games (£10 range he gets with pocket money) Christmas/birthdays new games as gifts.

People who regularly sell their games; put that money straight back into their next gaming purchase as they purchase regularly.

then the 3rd demographic is the people who are just selling their old stuff to make money.

take used games out the equation; whats the point of my son getting a console for maybe 5 or 6 maybe games a year max? (and he wont be the only child in a similar situation)
Mr/Miss regular games purchaser now has to find that cash elsewhere while games they dont play anymore gather dust.

how people can not see this having a negative effect on sales, is beyond me.
the publishers are going to be shifting less units, so the loss will be passed on to the gamer to recoup
(dont know who believed they would see any savings passed down to them from the publisher if the publisher did make more money from thsi idea. whoever you are, please donate me some of your optimism)

 

[Gmans uncle]

As a longtime fan of both TB and Jim, I think both their arguments are valid in their own rights and that anyone who legitimately cares about the used games market should give both of them a listen to see two, both valid, perspectives on a complex issue.
Personally I'm leaning towards Jim on this one in the short term 'cause I don't think publishers are really ready for the market dominance that would come from removing used games from the equation just yet, however I agree with TB 100% when he says that the way video games are monetized is fundamentally different then the way other forms of media are, and I agree that this whole thing will be rendered moot once we go all digital, which I have no doubt IS going to happen within the next 10 years. I used to be worried about the preservation of video games for the future, but perhaps that's best done through digital means as well.

I respect both of these men allot, and I think they both have valid viewpoints on the subject, watch both and form your own consensus, that's what I say anyway.

 

[Scott Rothman]

There is wear and tear though. I frequently spring for the new copy so that I don't have the bullshit sticker, missing manual, and sticky case.

 

[Sir Christopher McFarlane]

Jim explained, although I don't know whether I believe it, that retailers push used games because publishers only allow them to profit minimally from new sales. that would indeed be a great reason to push used games.

 

[Arslan Aladeen]

How come one of the big anti-used arguments always involves talking about how evil gamestop is, as if it's the only place to deal in used games? What happened to eBay, amazon, or just plain selling straight to a friend?

 

[Sir Christopher McFarlane]

How come one of the big anti-used arguments always involves talking about how evil gamestop is, as if it's the only place to deal in used games? What happened to eBay, amazon, or just plain selling straight to a friend?

I think it goes unmentioned because it's not relevant in numbers to impact sales, while Gamestop who has a near monopoly of USA game reatail is big enough to cause harm.

 

[Toxic Sniper]

Total Biscuit misses the point that the PC is an open system while consoles are not. Therefore, the loss of used games will not lower prices on consoles because there will be a monopoly. We know already that many gamers will purchase even with malware or drm attached to the disc; they're not going to be dissuaded by games not getting cheaper.

All of his other points are irrelevant to me as a consumer. It doesn't matter to me if the games industry will suffer or game developers will lose money; none of that means I should tolerate them taking away my ability to give away, rent, borrow, and sell games. Speaking of which, Total Biscuit is so focused on Gamestop and other resale retailers that he forgets that plenty of used games are sold directly between gamers, and unlike Gamestop, the games industry doesn't cuddle up with services like Ebay.

Essentially, until there is some real benefit to me as a consumer in taking away the ability to sell used games, I will not support this bs protectionism. Other industries have learned to open new sources of revenue to avoid the perils of giving property to people. If the game industry is unable to adapt in the same way, it's not going to do any better just because I give them my consumer rights.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

To everyone who says "Used games take away from a developer" let me say this. Unless they are contracted for royalties or published the game themselves they do not (and should not) get ANY money from game sales. The reason is they are already paid to make the game, they don't get paid after (again unless it's in the contract and that is a stupid deal to make). If you bought a game used that EA published (Mass Effect 3) then EA didn't get the money for that game, programmer Joe won't lose that money. Second issue I have with this, why should a publisher be able to double dip once a sale is made. By the way people act we shouldn't be able to share anything without paying the maker of the product per person we share it to.

Lets make it fair, if we want to watch a movie we bought (not rented, bought) and wanted to have a movie night then you should have to pay the movie studio/publisher a fee per person. And if you wanna say that is too far it really isn't, because you bought the movie for your personal entertainment, not a license to share with others. If you have a family and you want to buy a movie the whole family can enjoy, then you need to buy each member a copy. Can't share accounts either, if you bought a app with one account and you want your who ever to play with it, you should buy that person a copy of the app on his account (or tell him to buy it himself).

Also games have costed 50-80 dollars in the bloody 90's and I don't wanna hear crap about pricing. If publishers want to charge more nothing will stop them, most did it because a game had "24 megs of memory". We have games that can go up in the millions, yet is at a stable 60 bucks.

 

[Orks da best]

Personally I'll side with Totalbiscut, because Even though I like it when Jims talks about problems consumers personally have, and those that deals with important topics such as sexism and racism, things important on a social level. I loathe his opinions on topics such as used games, dlc, and publishers "evils". He has in those regards becomes more of a mouthpiece for gamers to latch onto to because he says what there thinking, which is what 90% of gamers say, the publishers beside valve are "evil!!!"

While Totalbiscut says his own opinion which I agree with more often than not and makes him seem less of someone who agrees with the masses and choose his own opinion, which in this day and age is something to be valued.

My opinion on used games, bugger all really, my game library is 95% new games, 5% uses, and those used games are not my most popular among my selection, they there just because I was curious about the game and couldn't find a new copy in the store.

But with today media going more and more digital its a fact that heavy use game buyers and lovers of physical media will have to face that such things will be of the past, so stock up on them now . I for one am happy of my halo collection, all the current games and halo 3 leg. edition. Because even though such things will fade. The memories and collection of today will not, and will not fade for years to come.

And like most things gamer related today, gamers one again annoy and disappoint me. Will they have make me happy to play games? Will they ever make me happy of the culture gaming has made? Or will we once again become what we have been for years? I hope we can change.

And anyone who wants to argue with me right now, think about it, What purpose does it serve to argue with someone who has made up his own opinion and will not be swayed without strong evidence.

 

[Jandau]

While I love both of them and enjoy their content, I think TB is in the wrong here, simply because he's missing a few points. Namely that the main difference (at least in that context) between PC and consoles is that there is more pricing competition on the PC. Why is this relevant? Well, simple: Even though the PC has pretty much done away with used games, there's so much competition that any content source has to try hard to stay relevant. Why do you think we have Steam sales? Because Valve isn't stupid and knows it has to contend with other distributors and even pirates.

On the other hand, what MS is doing with Xbone is taking away its only competition (or placing it firmly under its control) and getting to dictate all the pricing themselves. At that point, there will be no sales, there will be no discounts. Why? Because there will be no reason. Companies don't discount their products because they're nice, they do it to get you to buy their stuff instead of the other guy's stuff. But if there is no other guy, it's their way or the highway.

In general, Xbone seems to be all about giving console gamers the worst aspects of PC gaming without any of the benefits...

 

[Signa]

In short (because that's all I have time for), I think Totalbiscut is full of shit. There's so many gaping holes in his logic just because he worked at Game at some point in his life. It's like how I used to be convinced that piracy only hurt retailers because I worked at CompUSA and saw the ridiculous amounts of shit games they would buy (and no one else would) that obviously wouldn't sell if people pirated them. The logic was sound enough, because CompUSA had to buy those copies from the publisher, who then got the money, but clearly the effects of piracy run deeper than just that surface issue.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

Past that, its sales. Publishers take a huge amounts of profits though, with rumors going as high as 30-50%. Developers DO NOT get paid enough from publishers, and neither from console manufacturers for exclusives.

Developers should get royalties because they are the ones on the line here, they have the bulk of the risk because how cut throat publishers are.

Let's not also forget, the resale market is in part a beast birthed by triple-A publishers' less-than-ethical business strategies.

"Annualization" minimizes the lifetime of a given title, favoring new releases on a regular schedule opposed to continued support and periodic content releases for the game that already exists over a longer period of time. When games have extremely low longevity, there's little incentive to hold onto a new purchase -- especially when it can be quickly resold to mitigate the cost of the next low-longevity new release. Not only does that precipitate a flood of resales, but it nominally drives down the price of new purchases by the law of supply and demand!

Designing game titles to not be disposable -- meaning players had reason to hold onto their copies of games -- would go a long way towards curtailing the used game market.