WHY are used video games bad?

[Linkassassin360]

Ok, think about it: You trade in a game to gamestop for like 10% of what you paid (and though that is a big issue, its not the focus of the topic so I will avoid that debate), and then with this paltry amount of money you are SO much more likely to buy a used version of the game. In fact, you are much more likely to buy the used version if available because its practically just as good as a new copy, except in special cases of damage.
Now, why would you EVER pay full price for a game unless you want it release day. Simply wait a week and then some sucker has bought it, traded it in, and gamestop pockets not only the difference but what you put up to buy it. In an ideal situation a game is paid for nearly $100 and gamestop ends up only paying nearly $20 to get it back.
Needless to say, a developer works hard on a game, and dont you think they deserve to get their money's worth for the quality in the game they make? I know Im being the devils advocate, but its not free to make a game, and the more money you pay a developer, the more they will put out quality games

 

[emeraldrafael]

Because it is just hte money thing. developers are corporations, and they want the all mighty dollar.

 

[Strain42]

It is essentially a money thing, there's actually an episode of Extra Credits that goes into this subject a little bit deeper.

But like they said in that episode, if you go buy a new game from GameStop or something, only a small percentage of that actually goes to the developers of the game. If you buy a game used from GameStop, none of it goes to the developers.

So yeah, used games may be awesome for the player because they're cheaper, they really don't do the developers of the game any favors. I only buy used games if it's something I wanna play, but don't really have all that much support for.

If it's a game company you're trying to support and want to see more from them, it helps them out a lot more if you buy it new.

Like right now, I'm part of the crusade to help get Ace Attorney Investigations 2 localized in the states. The best way to do this is to try to convince people to pick up new copies of any of the AA games (yes, it hasn't been an easy task)

I thought I recognized your screen name from somewhere...

http://user.drunkduck.com/Strain42

Awesome webcomic, keep up the great work!

Yup, that's me lol, and thanks for the compliment, it made my day

 

[Twilight_guy]

Used games are bad because if you buy it used you get to play the game but none of your money goes to the developer. If you bought it new, the developer gets money. Developers want money and therefore want you to buy it new or at east charge you for used somehow to mitigate the lost of buying used. Is it a bad thing? Dunno, don't care. I don't support this "There just trying to get money" crap since most developers can't afford to be losing any sales and that argument is literally self-destructive to the entire industry as developers must make money or go under. I also don' think they need to hunt down every last dollar possible since sales can be lost without your stock plummeting. Its a complex issue and I don't have the numbers to tell who is right.

 

[CheckD3]

The problem I would assume is how people won't buy any new games at all and will buy them used. The fact that they have used copies of Brink a week later is what I find just crazy, because why would I buy a 60 dollar game, when with 10% off I could get a used copy, along with the already cheaper price, for only 50, that's 10 bucks I could also spend on ANOTHER game

Used games aren't the real problem. They aren't a problem at all, it's the used game retailers. They make more money selling us the used copies than the new, so they push them so much that it hurts the devs making anything at all. Them getting greedy is wrong, but it is understandable on their point of view of used sales.

Used games I find are the best because there are titles that aren't worth full price, and publishers and teams need to realize that we shouldn't shell out the money for games that are half-assed, or such. That's why I won't buy CoD games new anymore, why should I give them 60 bucks for a short, tasteless single player and an online experience that I'll eventually get bored of. 30 bucks, I'd buy that new for multiplayer, but not 60

 

[Jordi]

Don't you think it is kind of odd that when we buy games, we are apparently supposed to worry about who is getting our money, but if you buy anything else you don't. I mean, if I buy a used car, nobody is going to make a big deal about Wayne Enterprises not getting any of my money even though they built it. Why is it different with games?

Just thinking about it now...
Maybe a majority of car makers also own a variety of used car dealerships to earn extra cash on used cars.

They over price originals to compensate?

They usually regain the cost to make them early on?

Maybe... But why can't video game companies just do that? Also, cars are just an example (as so many people here seem to not understand). It works just as well for virtually any other product (e.g. golf clubs, vacuum cleaners, refrigerators, televisions).

I think a difference between the used car argument and the used game is that, if you get a used car, you get a used car. It's not as good as a new car (most of the time) because it is more worn. If you get a used game, it's almost exactly the same as a new game, and hence, the used game market is more attractive than the use car market (and hence, more of an issue).

Well, a used game isn't necessarily as good as a new one either. If you get it with the box, figurine, manual etc. those may have worn as well. And the game itself has become dated. You might even say that things like the graphics have "worn" (although of course technically they didn't, it just seems that way in light of the current games). Furthermore, you can buy perfectly fine second hand cars and other products.

But yeah, maybe it is more of an issue. Does anyone have any numbers on this? I still don't think that game companies should judge people for engaging in a perfectly normal and legal method of commerce though. If you are going to sell a product, you accept that after you sell it, it is no longer yours. It belongs to the buyer and he can now do whatever he wants with it (pretty much).

I just wish that they would find a constructive way to deal with their problems that doesn't involve making their own product inferior and/or judging their customers/fans. For instance, maybe they can get into the reselling business themselves. It will still be hard to deal with friend-to-friend selling, but it seems here that a large problem is the organized second hand market. Also, of course not every second hand sale is a lost first hand sale. Why do people buy second hand? I'm willing to bet it is mostly because of price. So if the game companies would just drop their prices after a certain period of time, those same people may prefer to buy the game new at the same price that they could get it used.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

Buying a used game is, to the game developers, a form of piracy because when they sell you a game they like to believe what they are selling you is a personal license for you to use that game. However, any person with a degree of intelligence realizes this is nonsense and realizes that there is no problem with buying used other than having to pay for DLC (still cheaper usually with the used price than the full game though).

 

[Lt. Vinciti]

No Offense

If Devs werent so worried about losing a sale to a used game...perhaps you should stop charging me $60 (+++ in other areas) for.....garbage...

or copypasta games (Madden/Call of Duty shit that gets released yearly)


Its sad that nowadays I label games as "Good,but not worth $60" and would rather wait and pay $20 used and not feel like I had been bent over and ream'd a new one for your mediocre parade...

 

[Sardonic]

What surprises me is that no one here has mentioned how GameStop intentionally makes used games such a huge issue for developers. First of all, their pre-order system is designed so that they know ahead of time exactly how many copies they need to buy from developers. Has anyone ever walked into a GameStop to buy a new game and been told "Sorry, we only have enough for pre-order customers?" This is not an uncommon phrase in that store.

The reason GameStop manages their store like this is it means they buy exactly as many copies as they need for their pre-order customers. No more. In any other business, you buy from the creators of a product as many as you think you need, then restock as time goes on. You do not tally how many people need toasters and buy exactly that many. That would be outrageous, as people do not generally know ahead of time when they will need toasters. GameStop buys exactly as many as they need, once, and then never have to restock. They simply buy back from the customers and resell to other customers. From this, they can minimize buying from the developers, and send as few games into circulation as possible. GameStop, unfortunately, gets away with this by being in essence, a monopoly. There is no other big company that specializes in selling games.

In a nutshell, the more games there are in circulation, the more money the developers make. For GameStop, the FEWER games there are in circulation, the more money THEY make, because they're just reselling the exact same copy over and over and over again. So we have conflict between the creators of our games and the salespeople who sell them to us. GameStop is working very hard to sell as many used games as possible and as few new games as possible. And they're doing a very good job. That's scary for developers, because they see little they can do about it. So they resort to finding ways to punish players for buying games used. Well, customers don't really like being punished for buying a product in a way a faceless corporation doesn't like for them to, so that sure as hell isn't making their own customers happy.

At this point I'm getting into topics that are discussed in a much more thorough, organized and thoughtful way in that episode of Extra Credits other people here have mentioned. I'll just post a link so you can have it right away.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2068-Project-Ten-Dollar

 

[NightHawk21]

I don't really mind buying pre owned games as I've yet to hear an argument that guilts me into buying their products for full price, whenever someone says "if you don't buy it full price the people who make the game get no money" I immediately picture Scrooge McDuck swimming around in his money pool. It's just a shame all AAA games aren't made by 1 person because that's how the music industry got me to feel guilty for illegally downloading music, they have the advantage of making you feel like you're stealing from the band, rather than Donald Trump.

Some developers are huge organisations rolling in money yes but other smaller developers are struggling. Square enix doesn't appear to be doing too well and that's a large developer. So unless we want microsoft and EA making the same thing over and over some support of the industry is needed. Also do you not picture say game, tesco or asda who all sell pre-owned games as huge organisations rolling round in money by selling something that not only did they not have to pay to make but by also giving none of that money to those who have had to invest time and money into making?

See the chart. They're doing better than they did in 2009 and almost as good as they did in 2005-2008. The reason they're not doing well is likely attritubted to the large drop between 2010 and 2011.

 

[Findlebob]

The store that sells them get every penny.

 

[Booze Zombie]

It gives them less money and if someone other than you is making money from your game to a signifigant degree, what is going to motivate you to create? Good will? The idea that you're helping the economy?

 

[Lukeman1884]

Here's an idea. Make games that actually keep you entertained for longer than a week or so. That way, there won't be as many people trading it in right after release day, and the people who normally wait for used copies to become available might just decide to buy it new instead of waiting for used copies.

 

[Nemesis729]

I don't think the problem is buying old games used, like previous gen stuff, But buying a new, used game that just came out for $55 instead of a brand new one for $60 none of the money goes back to the people who deserve it (Developers) it just goes to the people that you bought it from (Gamestop, etc.)

If it was me I'd be pretty annoyed too

 

[Auxiliary]

Just get rid of the middle-man. Digital distribution all the way.

 

[Omega Pirate]

Well if games cost around $10-$20 dollars new I would buy new. But I can't afford to spend $50+ on a single game. That leads me to buy used.

In my case the publishers are shooting themselves in the foot with the DLC. I just leads to me waiting for the full release, like a GOTY edition or a full compilation. If I know a game is going to have lots of high content DLC I will not buy it without the DLC.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Used games are bad because the games developers don't get any money for it.

It's like a legal pirated copy.

 

[AetherWolf]

If the game is out of print I think we deserve the right to buy it used. :/

 

[Jordi]

The simple problem the developers/publishers have is that every time one of thier games is preowned and bought again, they lose money because they dont get paid for the game being preowned, and the guy who bought it preowned now isnt going to buy a fresh one.

So yes, it is a money thing.

Maybe those developers/publishers could take a look at [font color="red"]literally any other industry[/font] and see how deal with this extremely common and legitimate phenomenon.

Umm what other industry that is like ours?. Books are relatively cheap to make so require very little sales to cover their production. Similarly films have 3 forms of income (cinema, dvd and tv reshowings) counter to videogames single form.

So comparing those other forms is mostly useless. Especially when games development is reaching the cost of movie development.

Maybe those developers/publishers could take a look at [font color="red"]literally any other industry[/font] and see how deal with this extremely common and legitimate phenomenon.

Show me.
Show me any other industry that is similar to video games that deals with such problems.
Film? They make money of cinema screenings and later profit shares when the movies get displayed in TV networks, not so much from DVD sales. Music? Loads of money in music industry comes from gigs and profit shares each time the song is played in media. Physical goods (cars, toasters, etc.)? Quantity limited by production, in case of those you buy actual product, not a copyright license to enjoy it.
Games only earn money when they sell, no sales no money.

You guys are kind of missing the point. You just showed me examples. I said that they should look at how other industries are dealing with it. The movie and music industries made sure sales weren't their only income. Books are cheap enough to make that it doesn't matter. And apparently the car industry (and every other industry) also figured out a way to remain profitable even though there are second hand sales.

Sure the game industry is different. Every industry is. But that doesn't mean that there is no potential to learn from other industries. For instance, since people in the music industry go out of their way to perform gigs, maybe the developers can do something similar. Maybe they can have meetings with fans, or they can organize gatherings where the game is played (kind of like a cinema) or discussed. If the game has a story, the writers can write a book or comic about it. Maybe in the future, someone can invent "game TV" or something: a game becomes available on a "channel" for a limited time, like a television show. Or they can just (try to) bring down costs (right now pretty much every game is a blockbuster). Or they can just figure out their own ways to keep being profitable (like a lot of the aforementioned industries did).
All of this may take some effort. Just like it takes effort for artists to tour the world, for writers to go to seminars and book signings, and for actors and directors to go to talk shows.
Also, these are probably not the best ideas. Just what one guy came up with quickly off the top of his head on a late Wednesday night. Every other industry figured out a solution.

BTW: the quantity of games is also limited in this scenario. If a second hand sale happens, the number of copies of the game in the world has remained exactly the same.

 

[Grickit]

No, seriously. What's the deal? Is it just a money thing?

It's a huge money thing. Every person that buys a used game is a person that didn't buy a legal copy.

From your perspective, yes you paid for it.
From theirs, you're playing the game, but they didn't get paid.