Used Game Sales are a "Bigger Problem Than Piracy"

[Deacon Cole]

This Oliver chap sounds like he doesn't really understand the nature of the business he works in.

 

[DustyDrB]

Here's why I won't pirate a game, but will always buy it used: legality. I'm not saying one or both are moral or immoral, but with one way there's a chance I get caught and fined. This is a hassle for me. Buying used, I save money. Selling the game back, I save money. I'm just looking out for myself. Nothing inconsistent there.

 

[Shru1kan]

I totally called this. Piracy isn't killing anything. The cocks making the budget be about 50% for DRM and 50% for an actual game are. Thats why most of my friends beat it once then trade it in. They think I'm NUTS for keeping the game past 2 months.

Piracy isn't a lost sale. If I pirate a game and I like it, I will buy it. If I don't, I get rid of it and it is never spoken of again. If I pirate music and like it, you can bet your ass I'll be at a concert when they come within 300 miles of me, and I'm buying merc and the CD's there.

I am NOT paying 50 bucks for a game when the specs for MINIMUM means running as smooth as Crysis on ultra high on an old MS-DOS based IBM. (I'm looking at you, ARMA 2.) I beat the minimum by a wide window and the thing still chugs on very low settings.

 

[beddo]

People have the right to sell goods privately. Much in the same way you have the right to trade in your old car or sell on your furniture. In fact many products such as are and furniture can increase in value but you don't hear manufacturers endlessly complaining about the used goods market.

Does anyone here know enough about copyright law to back this up? It makes basic sense-- raw goods & manufactured goods vs media-- and any refutations of this "sell the rights" idea are pretty historically unenforceable, but I don't know anything about what rights are *technically* non-transferrable when it comes to media.

If it were illegal then retailers would not be doing it. Even if the industry gets upset it would come down to a fight between lobbyists of both parties and stay the course of the status quo.

However, you are quite right that some software restricts you from transferring the rights to another person. This is usually covered in the EULA though its legal validity is well, unknown. At most you'd end up paying the corporation minor costs and the price of the software but even that would be highly unlikely.

PC software gets around this by applying things like CD-Keys and licencing the product to a person. This is because the PC market is has no Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo restricting the use of these types of codes for the main title or game content.

As much as you have a EULA with the publisher, so do they with the console manufacturer. They can't put in these restrictions because they're not allowed, as such, under the law, trading and selling console games and non-restricted games is completely legal, in the UK anyway.

 

[Triple AD]

first it was the pirates,
after that it was the used games,
next it will be the rental games,
then, the dreaded scourge that is people that play games at other people's houses.

then...they'll blame the nice weather. If it's nice outside, ppl spend less time gaming...and that's stealing money from the gaming industry.

Then they'll blame film because they take up time so you're not playing games therefore they are losing money
Then they'll blame holidays because you are not normally somewhere that has a games console so you're not playing games therefore they are losing money
Then they'll blame schools because they take half a day of potential gaming and 'teach' you things that don't involve games therefore they are losing money
Then they'll blame you

OT: One thing is if it is a used game then someone must of bought at some point so <Insert Publisher/Developer here> would still get money as opposed to pirating where they get for free most of the time and can then duplicate it which means that <Insert Publisher/Developer here> gets no money at all and lose potential customers causing a larger loss.

Another things is that no matter what people will still sell their videogames to people or perhaps hold 'underground' used game shops. Even if they are selling it to their friend it still counts the same. Not only that is there an actually reasonable way to get around this, sure you can form partnerships with the shop but that'll rarely work and what else force those to give their game to the Publisher/Developer.

EDIT: Also with the Project blabla one good idea is more of a compromise where EA could make it that New games get only one DLC but this one is a big one and then used games only have to buy a reasonably priced DLC and that's it.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Oh please, it is in no way hypocritical. Piracy completely circumvents any kind of payment whatsoever, whereas buying something secondhand requires that someone has first paid full price for the original game. There is absolutely no ground for comparison.

Someone has to buy the retail game before cracking can begin.

So, by your logic, piracy and the aftermarket are completely equal.

Not really? Only a couple of people will buy the game first, everyone else will download it. Compare that to people who buy trade ins, which according to the article can get traded on average between 2-4 times. That's far more copies of the game being sold.

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

GREED in the gaming industry have never been so stupidly justified...

 

[Frankster]

I'll say it again: it's hilarious to see the same people who attack piracy for "not compensating the developers" try to defend used games.


"LOLHYPOCRISYLOL"

This a hundred times over. It's ridiculous to say pirating is wrong then turn around and buy 10 used games. At least the pirates aren't in denial about what they're doing.

Dunno if I should feel targeted for the first comment but definitly am targeted by the 2nd (big buyer of used games and yup, pirating is wrong).
The 2 matters are completely different in that buying used games is part of your consumer rights and is ENCOURAGED by retailers (personally I'm beginning to think the problem lies with them, my own opinion is still being formed however)
Actually they are completely different on a wide variety of levels from the fact that you know, you kinda pay for a used game (problem is the money doesnt go to the devs) and don't for a pirated one, and if preowned games are a problem, how does this relate to other cases like cds and films you buy at discount stores or even in carboot sales?
(trying not to use some other good comparisons used by other people here such as the used car business).

This really is a complex topic worthy of a good debate, merely simplifying it to compare it to the pirating issue strikes me as an opportunistic means to justify pirating when the 2 matters are completely different.

And Pirates not in denial? We are not off the same planet if you truly believe that, I've only ever seen a handful of well written pro pirating posts that werent denials, justifications or positive experiences mistaken for real reasons.

 

[roeboat72]

Heh, I am still going to buy used games. Being in College means I can't afford to line their pockets with sixty bucks every time a new game comes out. I know they rely on profits, but I have a strong urge to eat as well besides playing video games.

 

[Plurralbles]

so... conceivably they could half the original game price and still come up with the same profit margins?

 

[Frankster]

YThe only reason this is an issue are large retailers. They're providing quantifiable evidence of the impact the aftermarket is having. Just as the only reason piracy is an issue is the fact you go to google, type [game/movie] torrent, and get millions of results. Torrents/retail vanish, and "gamer's rights" (something that never existed), makes a return.

Ah fair enough, misinterpreted the intent of your post then.

And I have right in front me a flier from Gamestop telling me I should trade my old games to have more money for newer ones. Yup, methinks retailers are definitly part of the problem!

 

[Tetsuhara]

I've been following this thread for a bit, and thought I'd share this article from a few years back. The writer is the head of Stardock, publisher of games like Galactic Civilizations II and Sins of a Solar Empire as well as running Impulse, a very good direct-download service that offers a lot of older games for good prices.

http://draginol.joeuser.com/article/303512/Piracy_PC_Gaming

 

[BrionJames]

I think what they're trying to justify is another increase in how much games cost.

 

[Weaver]

I'm just fed up with the industry giants constantly fucking complaining.
Baww we're only making 3 billion dollars a year.

They seriously need to shut the hell up.
Yes the developers should be payed for their work, but they need to calm the hell down.

Firstly, games are a lot of damn money. I don't know if the heads of the companies realize that $60 to $70 for a game is not chump change to the average person.

Secondly, DLC, DLC, DLC! Let's nickle and dime our customers with useless crap that they'll instantly regret paying for. Don't like a game? Too bad, you can't return it, haha!

Thirdly, customer service. My brief experience with customer service from EA has can be equated to basically "fuck you!".

Fourth, this sense of guilt they're trying to lay on everyone. You know what, I probably spend around five fucking thousand dollars a year ($5000) on video games and gaming related shit, how much more of my money do you bastards want?

Lastly, so these companies who spend years dicking around consumers in every possible way, with pricing, with shovelware, with useless DLC, with broken DRM and they FINALLY get screwed over by a perfectly legal reselling of their games and they ***** and moan about it like a child who didn't get his way.

How does it feel to be fucked around, gaming industry? Not good, does it? SO STOP DOING IT TO YOUR GOD DAMN CUSTOMERS. I personally don't care if the CEOs of the large companies can't afford three 50 room mansions and several Ferraris. It's the low level devs that do the REAL damn work and who should be making the REAL damn money.

 

[chronobreak]

I've only read the first 5 pages so I may be repeating a previous poster with this:

I buy some games near release, thus paying a LOT for them, I but some used, thus saving a bit and I buy most when they get a cheap release after some time. So There's that. The reason I buy some games new at release is not, in fact, to support the industry, but because I want the game. The reason I hold out for most games is that I don't feel like paying through my nose to get the game.

My role as a consumer is not to be responsible for supporting the industry. My role as a consumer is to acquire the goods that I want for a cheap a price as possible. That's basic market dynamics as far as I'm concerned. As a consumer it's not my business if the industry miss out on money. It's not my job to support them.

I think they got in wrong or upside down somehow. Consumers shouldn't care how they get the goods as long as it's legal. If the industry find used games a harsh competitor they better do something to win back consumers. In a free market there is no such thing as moaning about competitors. You out compete them or suffer. And EA seems to be trying to do something about it with the 10$ thing. That's perfectly good. Now it's up to the consumer to decide if the added valuer to the new product is enough to shift the sale. That's as it should be.

I also often buy used books. Not because I hate book publishers or authors but because it's cheaper. Same goes for some of my clothes and if I had a car it would likely be a used one.

I think there is a strange reverence for the games industry among fans and other people in the field. I must repeat: as consumers we are not responsible for a corporations bottom line. We are responsible for our own.

This isn't Soviet Russia for crying out loud. Do or die in the free market.

(I'm a communist by the way. )

Just so you know man, I get what you are saying and you are completely right. Blogs and gaming sites give gamers enough info to be able to feud with each other over which developer to support, gamers bare their teeth and throw money at their favorite developers because they feel so in touch with them, all the while every developer, publisher, whatever is going to the back room together to have a cognac.

 

[JonnWood]

Great, give pirates something else to crow about and misrepresent. Remember, pirates, this is an entirely subjective statement from one guy in the industry.

I also find it funny (read:hypocritical) how pirates will ignore or rationalize statements from publishers and game developers about how piracy is hurting them, but the second one of them says anything that could be construed as even vaguely supporting piracy, like this, they're behind it 100%. Digg's thread on this was all "Yeah, that means we should pirate stuff with poor DRM!" and I was all "NO DON'T YOU FOOLS".

I'm just fed up with the industry giants constantly fucking complaining.
Baww we're only making 3 billion dollars a year.

Logical fallacy: Fallacy of composition. Just because the industry as a hole makes a truckload of money doesn't mean certain developers are struggling.

Firstly, games are a lot of damn money. I don't know if the heads of the companies realize that $60 to $70 for a game is not chump change to the average person.

Then buy old games, Digital Distribution, or wait for the price to drop.

Secondly, DLC, DLC, DLC! Let's nickle and dime our customers with useless crap that they'll instantly regret paying for. Don't like a game? Too bad, you can't return it, haha!

Yes, how dare they make people purchase their product in an entirely voluntary fashion!

Thirdly, customer service. My brief experience with customer service from EA has can be equated to basically "fuck you!".

Point. I hear that EA's CS is crap, but I'd rather not tar everyone with that brush without anecdotal or personal evidence.

Lastly, so these companies who spend years dicking around consumers in every possible way, with pricing, with shovelware, with useless DLC, with broken DRM and they FINALLY get screwed over by a perfectly legal reselling of their games and they ***** and moan about it like a child who didn't get his way.

Point.

 

[Xanthious]

I can't agree more with the person or people who are saying that it's not their place as consumers to buy new vs used just because the developer sees some of the money. Buying new more times than not is a losing gamble. Either the game blows or its terribly short it gets repetitive halfway through and you'd rather saw off fingers than keep playing it.

I have to REALLY trust that the game is going to be worth my time before I make the leap to buy it new for the full price. I've bought probably close to 40 games between my systems this year. Of those 40 there are only 2 which I've purchased new. They are Batman Arkham Asylum GOTY and Super Street Fighter 4.

Looking ahead to later in the year there MIGHT be half a dozen games I will plan on buying new coming out yet this year. Those are Starcraft 2, WoW Cataclysm, Fallout Vegas, and should they actually come out this year Gran Turismo 5 and Half Life 2 Episode 3. Everything else is just too much of a gamble and I'd much rather wait and be able to buy it knowing if it is horrible or short or offends my delicate senses I can take it back and get my money back or a different game.

 

[(LK)]

I keep banging this drum not to justify piracy (most pirates know they're contributing nothing, but don't care, as its not like they'd suddenly stop), but because its hilarious to see all the arguments that're dismissed as "flawed" when used to defend piracy, put forth as solid when defending buying used.

The arguments:
-It was challenged 100 years ago in the courts (which, by the way... was prompted by a big, powerful publisher suing a big, powerful department store, don't cop the David v. Goliath emotive argument), and found to be ethical and rightful.
-It has been happening to publishers for centuries and has not removed their ability to be successful, booming industries.
-It is in keeping with common moral and societal norms with regard to individual and collective property rights
-It is not a crime.

None of these are used to defend piracy because none of them are true for piracy, while they are true for resale. This is because resale is very different from piracy. No new copies are created, piracy is the creation of illegal copies, not the lawful transfer of legally owned physical media.

Your repeated, desperate attempts to keep propping up the same "resale is a crime" strawman are desperate, failed, and insulting to people's intellect.

If the only way you can prove a point is by deliberate misrepresentation and conflation of its' facts, the basic fact of the matter is that you have no idea how to prove your point and are just stating emotions as facts and hoping nobody calls you on it.