Used Game Sales "Killing" Single Player Titles

[Micalas]

Edit: It all has to do with loss aversion. The publishers get money for their games, so they take any money they don't get that they feel they deserve as loss, which is not explicitly true. It's easier to trade in used games because people who think of things like "traders" think of things, do not experience the loss aversion (that is why getting less for a game than what you payed is ok). They also largely ignore bringing up the sales of the Walmart's of the world because the there is a greater emotional reaction to loss than there is to gains. To illustrate on a scale that is easy: Imagine you have no money. Someone gives you $10, you are happy about it. We'll say that increases your overall utility by 10 points (to keep it simple). Now, imagine if someone then steals that $10. While it seems like you simply lost 10 points of utility and you are simply back to where you started, you have an emotional reaction to that which makes it seem like you are put into a negative utility position. So, now instead of having 0 points of utility, you have -5 points of utility. While it's not true, the reaction is much worse at the loss than it is at the gain.

I'm glad there are other people that understand loss aversion. It's not a "lost sale" it's a "sale you likely wouldn't have gotten anyway."

I have an idea, video game industry. Put your money where your mouth is. Let's implement something that makes games untradeable. In exchange, you drop the price of every new game to $30-$40.

 

[walsfeo]

I'm really tired of the "used sales killing games" BS. These guys need to do something about it instead of bitching and moaning. It can't be all that tough.

Possible fix? Slash the prices down and sell the "engine" for $20 with some content. Then they can offer big chunks of DLC off of that same working system.

 

[jhlip]

Oh bull, they would still keep it at 60 bucks now that it has been the standard price for so long.

 

[tendo82]

I suspect that with the next console generation we'll see the beginning of the end of used game sales. So I get his point, but it's a 2007 point not a 2012 one. Between now and 2014 we'll see a huge change in the way console games are purchased.

PC games aside, Sony's Vita made the first substantive move in that direction. Yes, you can buy the games in retail, but by putting the games on the same format as system's storage they're basically telling the consumer to just buy an sd card and download your games for five bucks less. Will I be shocked if they start releasing Vita games online first at some point? Not at all.

They'll also probably start shipping less physical media to Gamestop as well, forcing scarcity that will drive people online to download the game.

 

[Chris Mosher]

The one thing that the gaming industry never really addresses here that I think will shoot them in the foot is what happens with the store credit customers get from thier trade ins. I spend my credit on new $60 games. I use my trade in credit to buy more games. Guess what happens if the market for used games disappears? I stop buying one $60 dollar game a month and the sales of new games drop. I am sure that I am not the only person who does this. I really want the games industry to address what happens to overall sales. Well I am off to trade in Mass Effect Three, may be I should just use it to pick up Game of Thrones or a season of Justifed.

 

[RandV80]

Like the article says it's a tough situation with no real good answer. The only thing I ever bother to point out in these discussions though that there's a clear difference between the video game industries and others, such as book or vehicle, in that with pretty much everything else there's a clear separation between 'new' and 'used' retailers. If you want a new book, you walk into a bright open spaced Chapter's with rows of new shiny books all neatly organized and arranged. Want a used book, you go into the dingy little 'hole in the wall' used bookstore where everything is cramped and the covers are faded. Unlike video games you don't buy them in the exact same place, and you definitely don't have the new book seller trying to offer you a used copy to save yourself a few bucks right at the point of sale.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

You pick a bad business model, that's your fucking fault, don't blame the people paying for your product.
If the game was worth keeping it wouldn't really matter, look at skyrim. No online, single player, but most people who bought it still have their copy because.......*drum roll* ... They want to play it again!

Same reason people keep anything, book, wanna read it again, movie, wanna watch it again, pretty fucking simple!

Want to slow down used sales make a game people wanna revisit, otherwise you don't deserve the extra money!

 

[Senare]

I would love to see the retailer (read Game Stop, Wall Mart etc.) cut of the loop and thereby giving developers the same or more amount of money when selling a game at perhaps half the price of today's games.

What if games sold by digital distribution could be sold a lot cheaper than the standard price, but that publishers will not lower the price because the physical retailers would cry foul and stop selling their game in stores? And if a large part of the market buy games from stores then that could cripple or kill a developer.

Sadly I can only guess at these things because I can not find hard data on what cuts developers, publishers, retailers, marketing departments, licensing fees (think Nintendo taking a cut because you develop for their system) get out of the market price. I have only a few lectures and vague estimates to go on.

I want as much money as possible to go to the people who made the game possible and the development of better titles. And when I view things from that angle, buying used games is no different from piracy.

 

[Zenn3k]

Just like used book sales prevent peoples writing from getting published....oh wait...that isn't true at all.

Its all bullshit in order to make the maximum profit available at the cost of anything and everything else.

Not making enough money? Raise prices!
Still not making enough money? Must be the pirates! DRM!
STILL not making enough money? Blame used sales!

After all, the kid who can't afford $60 but can afford $30 must be the reason you didn't make that standard 6000% profit PER SALE.

Its all bullshit. Without having to compete with used games, new game prices would be $200 a game. Thats what EA and Activision WANT.

 

[antipunt]

Sure. And the price of new cars would have dropped if they got a slice of resale.

Oh wait, it wouldn't. Because shareholders would just consider it extra profit.

An agreeable statement. Besides, resolve the resale and they'll just shift back to piracy for things continuing as they are.

Nothing would change, they're just blowing smoke.

And if they couldn't blame piracy, they'd say its because of development costs.

I really wish people would just accept these game publishers are out to make as much money as possible, and will use any strawman they can in an attempt to "hide" it (not that it should really need hiding, but then who else would give all these PR guys jobs?)

Yeah, I kind of agree. Even though there may be a tiny shred of truth in it, 99% of it just sounds like whining/excuse making to me.

Its all bullshit. Without having to compete with used games, new game prices would be $200 a game. Thats what EA and Activision WANT.

That's a good point actually. What the hell makes us think they won't just take advantage of the monopoly?

 

[WolfLord]

Hell, look at DLC if you need proof to this fact. DLC is used proof. How many times excluding steam do you see ANY retailer be it XBL, PSN, or other DLC platform do you EVER see the price of DLC reduced?

Just wanna start with that I agree about the used game market and it needs to exist. BUT dlc on xbla does go on sale. Rarely, and not often enough for me to get half of the ones I would like to, but they do lower the prices every now and then.

That's why I find my self being pulled into PC gaming. Overall it's cheaper and steam puts up sale's every day, and massive ones 3-4 times a year.

 

[FiatCelebrity]

I meant to post this earlier but I guess I only posted it to facebook. It turns out a lot of people seem to be seeing through all the anti-used games propaganda around here, and that's refreshing.

The only way to "fix" the used games "problem" is to enforce what copyright laws are suggesting is implied in the purchase of "intellectual property." Legally, when we buy a music CD or video game or movie, we're actually just buying permission to use the product in a "non-commercial" venue, or to consume it as our own personal use. In this way, copying a CD or movie or game that YOU PURCHASED is still illegal because they are claiming that even the physical media object on which the content is contained is their property and they are simply allowing the purchaser to use it for the activities that are not threatening to their business. Why they haven't applied this angle to the used games battle yet, I do not know, but following the "logic" of legislation, it seems that would be how they would get their stranglehold.

Of course, if one were like me and didn't see pressure on the games industry to lower their prices and budgets as a bad thing, one should be thanking Gamestop for weathering the storm of misallocated blame and continuing to make games affordable. No one is entitled to video games, no one is entitled to make money from video games, and no one should be accosted with negative energy for buying video games and selling them at prices people are willing to accept and pay. If media companies seriously want to insist that I am implicitly agreeing to a pages long contract that forbids me to use a piece of plastic I bought for $60 or less in ways that would benefit me and spread the awareness of their product if it's good, I would rather not do business with them. The market is evolving, everything is getting cheaper and easier, and it's becoming exponentially harder to make money on data any more. Should we punish those who are picking the low-hanging fruit of abundance, or should these sissy artist types who depend on the media they create find another way to improve their product so that people will pay for it when they don't have to?

 

[Alma Mare]

"those people who buy it on day one may well finish it and return itthose people who buy it on day one may well finish it and return it"

We can finish the game in one day. There's absolutely no obvious solution or room for improvement there. No sir.

 

[WolfLord]

Braben said that having a game sell out the first day is not a good thing anymore. "The idea of a game selling out used to be a good thing, but nowadays, those people who buy it on day one may well finish it and return it," he said. "People will say 'Oh well, I paid all this money and it's mine to do with as I will', but the problem is that's what's keeping the retail price up.

It's an egg-or-chicken problem, then: if they made it cheaper in the first place, there would be less reason to resell it.

Say, I pay $15 for a game. It's not a lot of money, so I might as well keep it, why not.

Say, I pay $60 for a game. It's quite some money, so after I beat it, unless it's absolutely awesome, I better sell it and recoup some of it.

This.
If i couldn't sell back the games that aren't worth keeping, I wouldn't be able to afford this hobby. The industry can cry all the rivers they want, but if it weren't for game stop (or whoever would take them) my consumption would be cut drastically. Without that dark pawnshop that eats souls (or so I've been told) I may have video games quit years ago. And to the people that say I "hurt" the industry, or whatever, kindly go fuck yourself. Without used games I wouldn't have shelled out the 40 bucks for borderlands complete edition, and because I did, I went and pre-ordered the second. That story is only one of dozens of games and franchises that have made me buy new only after buying the previous one used.

 

[Redd the Sock]

I see nothing but entitlement on both sides.

Gamers need to get that content for dollar, games are dirt cheap compared to the NES days when they were still 60 dollars (80 to 100 if you were into RPGs). Also the existance of gamestop and other used racks right next to the new ones makes comparable models difficult to find. It's not like someone at the bookstore is saying don't buy the book, borrow it for free at no additional hassle.

Developers need to get it in their head they are not entitled to money for every player of their game. I doubt they got money from game rentals back in the day either, which is how most of us got games to play. We are entitled to resell goods, give them away, lend them to friends, and do other things that will probably mean someone won't buy your game to play it. That is a fact and we'll probably stop playing if you have to be in such tight control at all tims.

 

[4173]

Like the article says it's a tough situation with no real good answer. The only thing I ever bother to point out in these discussions though that there's a clear difference between the video game industries and others, such as book or vehicle, in that with pretty much everything else there's a clear separation between 'new' and 'used' retailers. If you want a new book, you walk into a bright open spaced Chapter's with rows of new shiny books all neatly organized and arranged. Want a used book, you go into the dingy little 'hole in the wall' used bookstore where everything is cramped and the covers are faded. Unlike video games you don't buy them in the exact same place, and you definitely don't have the new book seller trying to offer you a used copy to save yourself a few bucks right at the point of sale.

+1

I think that is the key concern in the industries mind. A used copy sitting for sale at $55 or similar, a week after the games launch date.

At one point used carried the very real threat of a copy that was damaged or completely trash. These days, not so much. With other retailers, car dealerships for example, that sell new and used products there are real differences between products. Used appliances, or used clothes, same thing.


edit: what is the real difference between wear on a used car and an online pass?

 

[Griffolion]

Ironically its the high price of games that make for such a large used game market.

Yes, yes, and just once more, yes.

 

[Irridium]

Yes, because that's why Skyrim, Fallout 3, New Vegas, Kingdoms of Amalur, Dragon Age Origins, Arkham City, and Mass effect 1 & 2 were all big failures.

Because they didn't have multiplayer components.

Also, perhaps Gamestop would be more open to sharing used game profits if Publishers were more open to not leaving only $3 or so in profit from new sales. Just a thought.

 

[Matt King]

but... to sell a game second hand it has to have been bought first hand (unless i'm missing something) so surely it can't be that bad (still bad i know but) so develepors if you want to not lose money on second hand sales make a game that is so good no one will ever trade it in

(although i personally have no problem with dlc, none of this wah wah it's ripping us off bullshit, you're paying for extra stuff)