UK Retailer Says No to Resident Evil: The Mercenaries Trade-Ins

[Irridium]

Aaaaand we get to the point that annoys me about this site. Why is EVERYTHING 'Oh, this isn't so bad, but it sets a bad precedent.

Shit happens, people! That doesn't make it a conspiracy. The Mercenaries isn't the first game not to let you delete your save file.It's not even DRM, for god's sake, but SO many people were bitching in the last thread about this that 'Oh, how dare they force this horrible DRM on us!' It ain't DRM. Jeez.

Yeah, shit happens. Doesn't mean we should just sit back and not say anything about it. This kind of crap pisses people off, and people are saying as much in their own way. It's also the first time many are experiencing this. Yes it happened for games before, but considering how people are acting, I'm guessing they didn't buy or play those games.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

Ugh. Spend a week doing something genuinely related to the development side of the games industry and you'll understand why trade-ins are evil.

Hopefully I don't have to explain how many man hours go into making a game. The more people who buy trade-ins, the less money the developer has. The less money the developers have, the more they try to cut back. So basically, people get fired and the people who don't get fired get paid less for doing more work. This has an impact on release dates, on the quality of games and on the companys willingness to experiement.

Next time you complain about dull brown/grey shooters, think about that. I can't believe that people think it's a problem that game developers deserve to get money from people buying their games.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Now I wonder if people would rent this game to see if they like it and get angry if they can't start from the beginning. I don't know much about the game so I'm not sure if a new game rewrite is available.

 

[Aztek463]

You know, Chrono Trigger for the DS had no delete feature. Know how I got around that? I overwrote the file.

I thought of this too. I wonder if the game doesn't allow for this either, hence the big fuss.

It doesn't really matter, since if I want to play The Mercenaries, I'll just fire up my Xbox and pop in Resident Evil 5, or maybe 4 on my PC if I'm feeling "old school."

 

[-Dragmire-]

Ugh. Spend a week doing something genuinely related to the development side of the games industry and you'll understand why trade-ins are evil.

Hopefully I don't have to explain how many man hours go into making a game. The more people who buy trade-ins, the less money the developer has. The less money the developers have, the more they try to cut back. So basically, people get fired and the people who don't get fired get paid less for doing more work. This has an impact on release dates, on the quality of games and on the companys willingness to experiement.

Next time you complain about dull brown/grey shooters, think about that. I can't believe that people think it's a problem that game developers deserve to get money from people buying their games.

That being said, is there a demo for people who don't know if they want the game? Do they have to pay full price just to test it out? If they hate the game, it's then a complete waste of money for them as they can't return it at all. Developers definitely need a way to get money from used sales but I think destroying that market is the wrong way to do it.

 

[Phenakist]

Well, this is like buying a new sports car for full price, with no warrenty, no spare parts, it's a 1 seater, with limited milage, OH and you can't trade it for a new car. Anyone? Nope, didn't think so.

This is an appropriate comparison, as the two industry are similar, granted the Video Games Industry is more personal, but still. You don't see Car manufacturers moaning on about people buying used cars do you?

I'm well aware of all the work that goes into making the games, and I know trade in's and second hand games take a bit of cash out of the dev's pocket over time. But, why do something like that on a game like Resident Evil? with such a huge following? OF COURSE it was going to sell, but putting something so restricting on it just ruined the game for myself and the bulk of the audience. Project "10 Dollar" is acceptable, that makes perfect sense if I pick up a game for cheap and pay to get the unrestricted version, I've STILL got the game cheap, and contributed to the dev, everyone wins. But this, just no.

In short, why try and protect income you're not going to get?

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Well done capcom.
Seriously well done.
I now almost feel like pirating all of your games just out of spite, even though i have no intrest in them. (i won't btw)
OUT OF SPITE!
So... does this mean if your running low on memeory you can't free up some space?
Or does it work differently for this?

 

[Xanthious]

Ugh. Spend a week doing something genuinely related to the development side of the games industry and you'll understand why trade-ins are evil.

Hopefully I don't have to explain how many man hours go into making a game. The more people who buy trade-ins, the less money the developer has. The less money the developers have, the more they try to cut back. So basically, people get fired and the people who don't get fired get paid less for doing more work. This has an impact on release dates, on the quality of games and on the companys willingness to experiement.

Next time you complain about dull brown/grey shooters, think about that. I can't believe that people think it's a problem that game developers deserve to get money from people buying their games.

Seriously, what makes games any more special than movies, books, cars, homes, blenders, I can go on. Games are just another item to be bought and sold. If they aren't pulling a big enough profit making multi million dollar productions then that is a problem on their end not because of any second hand seller or market trend.

Game makers need to stop acting like entitled twats that think that their particular good is somehow special from all the other goods that have been produced and sold in the history of goods being produced and sold. They aren't. This is the only industry you hear this kind of ***** coming from. If they can't sustain a profit making games with a certain business model then the problem is with their business model nowhere else.Game makers deserve fuck all from a second hand sale of a game. For them to claim otherwise is pure greed or a total lack of understanding how goods are bought and sold around the world.

Furthermore, they DO get money when people buy their games. They have to be bought initially for them to be available secondhand in the first place. They essentially want to resell the same copy of a game multiple times. Well that's fine, then they need to be the ones paying out of the pocket to buy it from the consumer. The game makers aren't spending any of their money to buy it back from the people who are trading it in, Gamestop is. Game makers are fully able to purchase back used games and sell them if they choose just like Gamestop does. However, they choose to sit around bitching and butthurt over not getting special treatment that no other maker and seller of goods has ever enjoyed.

 

[numbersix1979]

So, I am buying a game i can only play once.

Snort...No.

This also means you won't lend someone else the game to see if they like it, so word of mouth goes straight out of the window...

...and what happens if there is a bug in the game that corrupts your save file.

Seriously, this. I mean, isn't it kind of revealing that Capcom is obviously waaaay more interested in making a quick buck off of 'stopping' used game sales than making a good product worthy of paying full price of?

Just so it's clear, I'm not against Capcom making money. They're a business. They are within their rights to do this. But that means I have just as much right to complain. If Capcom wants to court us as consumers, then they should definitely do so in a way that makes the fan base more happy and more willing to open their hearts and wallets to the RE franchise. Though there's no real problem, technologically or morally speaking, with them screwing with the save data to make the game less retail-friendly, if that's the way they want it, they should be prepared to find out they have made a significant marketing blunder and face the consequences thereof.

 

[Treblaine]

Well the game costs about £35 over here, that in yankee money is $56 (though over here Sales Tax is always included in the price). So for such a short and relatively crap game, being denied a decent trade in value is 100% bullshit.

Now if this had been a downloadable game (inherently no resale) then it might have worked but ONLY if it was at around $15-$20! A $40 physical game is only worth that price as it can be traded in for $20-$25.

Capcom is trying to eat their cake and still have it. They want to fuck the trade-in market but refuse to give any concessions to the customer to make it worth while to spent $40-50 on this game.

 

[William Fleming]

You know, Chrono Trigger for the DS had no delete feature. Know how I got around that? I overwrote the file.

Did Chrono Trigger have multiple save file slots (never played the DS version), because this game apparently doesn't so you can't even overwrite the save file. I think that's why everyone is getting so upset.

 

[zefiewings]

Reading through the article and all the posts, it seems like people are in the wrong impression. It's just because an article was written that we are freaking out. But, as a lot of people have mentioned, many games have had it that you need to go and overwrite a game in order to "delete" it. It is not exactly new, especially in the hand-held market. On top of that, most people don't seem to realize that there is no actually "story", so it is not a matter of play-throughs. All and all, it seems really crappy when you first read it but the more you let it sink in the more you realize that this is being blown way out of proportion. I really don't think they meant is as a re-sell thing. How do gaming stores not notice that similar things have already happened in other games? I think if it was a story game it would be a lot different to.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Ugh. Spend a week doing something genuinely related to the development side of the games industry and you'll understand why trade-ins are evil.

But the industry side tends to focus on all the used sales and not asking what the money gained by the person doing the trade in is spent on... and it's usually put toward a new game. Crippling 2nd hand sales might look good on paper but at the cost of removing the main way the most regular customers suppliment their gaming budget? Sounds like a bigger risk than they realise to me.

 

[Phoenix Arrow]

Seriously, what makes games any more special than movies, books, cars, homes, blenders, I can go on. Games are just another item to be bought and sold. If they aren't pulling a big enough profit making multi million dollar productions then that is a problem on their end not because of any second hand seller or market trend.

Game makers need to stop acting like entitled twats that think that their particular good is somehow special from all the other goods that have been produced and sold in the history of goods being produced and sold. They aren't. This is the only industry you hear this kind of ***** coming from. If they can't sustain a profit making games with a certain business model then the problem is with their business model nowhere else.Game makers deserve fuck all from a second hand sale of a game. For them to claim otherwise is pure greed or a total lack of understanding how goods are bought and sold around the world.

Furthermore, they DO get money when people buy their games. They have to be bought initially for them to be available secondhand in the first place. They essentially want to resell the same copy of a game multiple times. Well that's fine, then they need to be the ones paying out of the pocket to buy it from the consumer. The game makers aren't spending any of their money to buy it back from the people who are trading it in, Gamestop is. Game makers are fully able to purchase back used games and sell them if they choose just like Gamestop does. However, they choose to sit around bitching and butthurt over not getting special treatment that no other maker and seller of goods has ever enjoyed.

Are you serious?
First of all, you say games don't deserve any different treatment that films and book get... but that's the point. Who buys second hand films or books? They aren't more special and they are to be bought and sold, BUT NOONE BUYS A SECOND HAND BLENDER. Why would you even make the comparison? I don't know. The only thing that is bought second hand as much as video games is cars and if Mercedes sell a car, they'll get 100% of that money. Capcom would get 30%
Your whole arguement is based around video game devleopers acting like their medium deserves special treatment when it's the only one getting that treatment.

As for acting like retailers are heroes for having the charity to buy back games at 10% of the price they sell it as preowned... you almost made a good point. Companies should buy back their own games and sell them on their website as preowned, that's not a bad idea. But noone would bother. Selling something to a retailer is just easier.

But the industry side tends to focus on all the used sales and not asking what the money gained by the person doing the trade in is spent on... and it's usually put toward a new game. Crippling 2nd hand sales might look good on paper but at the cost of removing the main way the most regular customers suppliment their gaming budget? Sounds like a bigger risk than they realise to me.

No, that's true. I support what you're saying. My post wasn't a reaction to the news topic but more a reaction to other peoples reactions.

 

[Xanthious]

Are you serious?
First of all, you say games don't deserve any different treatment that films and book get... but that's the point. Who buys second hand films or books? They aren't more special and they are to be bought and sold, BUT NOONE BUYS A SECOND HAND BLENDER. Why would you even make the comparison? I don't know. The only thing that is bought second hand as much as video games is cars and if Mercedes sell a car, they'll get 100% of that money. Capcom would get 30%
Your whole arguement is based around video game devleopers acting like their medium deserves special treatment when it's the only one getting that treatment.

As for acting like retailers are heroes for having the charity to buy back games at 10% of the price they sell it as preowned... you almost made a good point. Companies should buy back their own games and sell them on their website as preowned, that's not a bad idea. But noone would bother. Selling something to a retailer is just easier.

There are stores all over dedicated to selling used media. Hell I personally buy most of my DVDs and Blu Rays secondhand. Back when I played pencil and paper RPGs I got most of my RPG books secondhand as well. It's just a better deal. Books are the same way. Used bookstores, while not a popular as they once were, can still be found in most cities.

As for the price Gamestop buys back games for well that's between Gamestop and the person selling the game. If the person feels it's too low they are more than free to sell it to someone other that Gamestop via eBay or craigslist or to a friend, etc. However, even at those low prices, people are still damn near lining up out the door to sell or trade their games to Gamestop of their own free will. You can't fault Gamestop really.

The real problem in all this though is this. If game makers really want to encourage people to buy new they need to give incentives to do so. Make the new product better than the used. This is different than holding back content already on the disc or taking away multiplayer. That is just punishing those who buy used. There is a difference. People aren't stupid they know a dick move when they see it and things like project 10 dollar and their ilk are just that, dick moves. Maybe they include a small collectible item, maybe they offer the first piece of DLC (NOT day 1 DLC already on the disc) free to new customers. Actually make it a worth while endeavor and not addition by subtraction.

 

[MrGalactus]

GENIUS!
Stop used sales...by discouraging new sales!
BRILLIANT!

 

[Just_A_Glitch]

Eh. I'm still going to buy it once I get a 3DS. IF Capcom wants to do this, they're well within their right. Besides, this is only Mercenaries mode anyway. All creating a new game would do is getting rid of your record times and re-locking characters. If I bought this used and saw someone else had set some good time, I'd probably play it more to try and beat their time.

I don't trade in Resident Evil games regardless, so can't say this bothers me.

 

[Treblaine]

Also, I am a PC gamer mainly, so for those complaining that they wont be able to resell their games: Boo hoo...I havent ever been able to do that, but ya know what? I keep buying them.

The hoarder in me likes this, I hated back then I gamed mainly on consoles, I couldn't afford a new game without sacrificing several others to the trade-in god. Then when I wanted to go back and play that really cool game... shit, I sold it. AND I BUY IT BACK FROM THE SAME STORE GRRAHAHAHHAH-AHHH!!!

Yeah, but PC gamers pay less. Especially with Steam Sales. Hold on while I check my account and see how much I have spent ...

... turns out in the past 4 years I have spent around £1100 for 270 games.

That is on average only £4 per game!

Still, £1100 over 4 years, that's £275 per year. Only 5 new games per year including Xbox Live Gold Membership if I were on console.

Steam has spoiled me, every time I go games shopping (retail) I see console games on average 4x their price on Steam, they play worse and I've even get put off starting playing on my console. See, I fire up my console and get comfortable on the couch (the main appeal of console games) then realise unlike steam I can't just pick the game I want from an easy library! I have to go hunting for a game disc GRRAAAARG!