Epic says developers could make game endings into DLC and charge for it.

VideoGameing247

"The secondary market is a huge issue in the United States. Our primary retailer makes the majority of its money off of secondary sales, and so you're starting to see games taking proactive steps toward that by… if you buy the retail version you get the unlock code," he said.

"I've talked to some developers who are saying 'If you want to fight the final boss you go online and pay USD 20, but if you bought the retail version you got it for free'. We don't make any money when someone rents it, and we don't make any money when someone buys it used - way more than twice as many people played Gears than bought it."

Michael Capps

Bad idea, or worst idea ever? I report, you decide.:P

Well, it's about time that popular developers start complaining about the used game market, but this idea is just ridiculous and wouldn't accomplish much. People would just youtube it or something.

Its interesting to say the least, and an inventive way to stop the used game industry, but with all the hoopla about missing DLC codes the last couple months it may also be a plan that has the potential to backfire.

Still, with more and more developers looking to strangle out used games something like this is bound to happen sooner or later. Doesn't bother me though, I rarely buy used games anyways.

Wow, this is the biggest load of BS ever. EPIC used to be about giving their community the bonus goodies for no charge, and it looks like greed has gotten the best of 'em. If anything, developers need to learn from the great team of developers at Criterion. They release huge updates for their games at no charge whatsoever, and that keeps the game in demand, and gets it more free publicity every single time a new update is released.BioShockOwnz

Epic used to give their customers bonus packs and stuff (the used game market on PC is very, very small and limited, especially when it comes to online games). Releasing free content for people who bought the game used is ridiculous.

The first thing that comes to mind is paying $20 for the 'opportunity' to fight General Raam in the first Gears, and how horrible an example of a boss fight that was.

I'm still of the same mind as I was when that Lost Winds developer was spraying tears everywhere - make a game that feels good to play, has a lot of content and make the player want to replay it. They'll buy it - no need to throw in extra hooks or punishments to keep them from renting or buying used.

Sure, some people will always buy games used, but they shouldn't even be factored in to their profit planning.

The first thing that comes to mind is paying $20 for the 'opportunity' to fight General Raam in the first Gears, and how horrible an example of a boss fight that was.

I'm still of the same mind as I was when that Lost Winds developer was spraying tears everywhere - make a game that feels good to play, has a lot of content and make the player want to replay it. They'll buy it - no need to throw in extra hooks or punishments to keep them from renting or buying used.

Sure, some people will always buy games used, but they shouldn't even be factored in to their profit planning.

DJ_Lae

I agree 100%. Treating gamers like potential criminals instead of potential sales isn't doing this industry any favors.

I think the topic title is misleading because Epic really isn't suggesting anything, Capps just cited what someone else proposed, he didn't even agree or disagree with the idea. And, of course, it's a horrible idea. What about the people with no online?

Seriously, I'm tired of developers who sell millions of copies complain about profit and scheme how to squeeze more money from people.

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]

The first thing that comes to mind is paying $20 for the 'opportunity' to fight General Raam in the first Gears, and how horrible an example of a boss fight that was.

I'm still of the same mind as I was when that Lost Winds developer was spraying tears everywhere - make a game that feels good to play, has a lot of content and make the player want to replay it. They'll buy it - no need to throw in extra hooks or punishments to keep them from renting or buying used.

Sure, some people will always buy games used, but they shouldn't even be factored in to their profit planning.

rragnaar

I agree 100%. Treating gamers like potential criminals instead of potential sales isn't doing this industry any favors.

Yes, people who buy games used are potential sales (because they actually pay for their games), but Giving them more content won't make them buy games new: preventing them from getting the full experience when buying it used will.

It's not the same as piracy where it's established in the gaming community that it's wrong. Most people just go "lol, it's legal so it's fine" and buy games used any time they can save any money at all. Developers need to give them an incentive to buy the games new (i.e. making that version superior).

I think the topic title is misleading because Epic really isn't suggesting anything, Capps just cited what someone else proposed, he didn't even agree or disagree with the idea. And, of course, it's a horrible idea. What about the people with no online?

UpInFlames

I know.:P I made the topic title a little misleading to stir things up and get a discussion going. I realize Capps doesn't necessarily speak for the company in an official capacity when he said this, and that he may or may not agree that is a good idea. Mostly, I wasn't creative enough to come up with a decent thread title.

Game endings being turned into DLC wouldn't work, but eventually a developer or publisher will come up with a way to separate original buyers (who put money in their pockets) from guys who are buying used.

The most obvious path would be the PC copy protection route, but I think that would be too restrictive. Perhaps a game linking itself to the profile of the original owner? Some guys go through multiple systems and take games over to buddies' homes and what have you but most stick with the same profile. Of course, such a system would require an internet connection for verification, but missing out on online play/downloads/updates/leaderboards would cause more people (how many more is anyone's guess) to pay for original copies.

Another cool thing companies could do would be to cut prices quicker and deeper than they have this generation maybe have a hard mark at which prices fall (i.e. at the three month mark prices fall to $40, at the six month mark to $25, at the year mark to $15).

My biggest issue, is that I feel like I own the game when I buy it, regardless of whether I bought it new or used. A change like this would make it seem more like I'm paying $60 to license their game.rragnaar

That's how PC gaming works. That's why there's no used/rental market on PC, but it's offset by higher piracy rates. If such a system would come true on consoles, I suspect piracy would increase on consoles as well. Something's gotta give and a lot of people simply wouldn't opt for the more expensive solution. Developers simply can't count used/rental/piracy as lost sales, it's insane.

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

I think the topic title is misleading because Epic really isn't suggesting anything, Capps just cited what someone else proposed, he didn't even agree or disagree with the idea. And, of course, it's a horrible idea. What about the people with no online?

rragnaar

I know.:P I made the topic title a little misleading to stir things up and get a discussion going. I realize Capps doesn't necessarily speak for the company in an official capacity when he said this, and that he may or may not agree that is a good idea. Mostly, I wasn't creative enough to come up with a decent thread title.

If I'm not mistaken though, Epic did take a step in that direction by including codes for multiplayer maps in the retail copies, didn't they? I haven't gotten the game yet myself.

Also, as was mentioned before, a very significant portion of console users don't hook their consoles up to the internet. How would they get their content, be it the ending of the game (and Epic even mentioning this is a poor example - who would pay $20 for the final bosses in either Gears game?) or other goodies, if they don't have a broadband connection? Also, that's just one more manufacturing issue to go wrong. Remember in the last month, we found out that Fable II CE's were shipped without the codes for the special content, the PC version of NBA2K shipped without the Steam activation codes which prevented anyone from playing the game until a fix was made, and another EA game (Red Alert 3 I think?) shipped missing a letter from the CD keys. That's in just a month, and only a small fraction of games ship with keys and codes at this point.

I can see why companies want to do this, but the implimentation really concerns me. That plus not everyone can afford $60 for a new game, especially these days.

wow, what a load of BS!

But it's business, and all businessmen are money hungry Dbags.

How about this idea Epic? Make an AWESOME game, and constantly give fans free DLC?

That way, no one will even THINK about selling the game, and no games sold = no used copy avaliable.

How's that for an idea?

[QUOTE="rragnaar"]My biggest issue, is that I feel like I own the game when I buy it, regardless of whether I bought it new or used. A change like this would make it seem more like I'm paying $60 to license their game.UpInFlames

That's how PC gaming works. That's why there's no used/rental market on PC, but it's offset by higher piracy rates. If such a system would come true on consoles, I suspect piracy would increase on consoles as well. Something's gotta give and a lot of people simply wouldn't opt for the more expensive solution. Developers simply can't count used/rental/piracy as lost sales, it's insane.

I'm confident it would, indeed.

I don't understand why so many developers hate pre-owned games. The most profitable sector for game shops are pre-owned games right. And game developers games are sold in game shops right. Well if there is no more pre-owned games then its unlikely that game shops will have enough money to stay in business which means game developers have nowhere to sell their games beside flogging them off in the street. All these complaints show is that game developers have no foresight.Trooperdx3117

unfortunately, that's not true.

The only big used game store is gamestop. Even without them, retail stores can sell their games without much problem using other large stores like Best Buy and Walmart.

Of course what this means is older gems will eventually get forgotten quickly, which is negative towards smaller companies.

Obviously a bad idea, so bad that the person who thought it up should not be allowed to think for himself ever again.

I understand the used games issue when looking at how GS handles them, buying back new games and selling them used for only $5 less, thats too extreme and GS is taking advantage of many people, but again its those people's right to be dumb and do that.

What I dont like is the effect on rentals. I am sorry but rentals have been a part of every form of media entertainment, why should gaming get a free pass. What the hell is he talking about them making no money from rentals, how do you think the stores got all those copies in, THEY BOUGHT THEM.

The simple solution is for these companies to start selling this stuff directly, allow people to rent from the company, allow them to sell it back and the company have a used section.

dvader654

I'm sure something of that nature will eventually cross many publishers' minds if it hasn't so already. But I think it'll just come down to ever-increasing emphasis on digital distribution. *pukes*

I don't understand why so many developers hate pre-owned games. The most profitable sector for game shops are pre-owned games right. And game developers games are sold in game shops right. Well if there is no more pre-owned games then its unlikely that game shops will have enough money to stay in business which means game developers have nowhere to sell their games beside flogging them off in the street. All these complaints show is that game developers have no foresight.Trooperdx3117

The reason why (I think really the publishers more than anyone) have a problem with the secondhand market is because they don't make money off it. Retailers that deal in 2nd hand games keep all the profits, and publishers see the people who buy used games as potential sales for unused games that have to potential to translate into money in their pocket. Furthermore, I think we're seeing a big fuss over this now because publishers are shifting a lot of their whining from piracy to the secondhand market (and they're very late to the party).

I really can't speculate how badly it would hurt Gamestop if they couldn't sell used games anymore as I don't know how dependent they areon them, though I know they make a lot of money from selling them. But really, it Gamestop went out of business, it would mean practically nothing in terms of publishers having the ability to sell their games at a retailer. Plenty of dapartment stores sell games, and one of them is a larger game retailer than Gamestop is, anyway. All it'd probably mean is that secondhand market would get bigger online.

[QUOTE="dvader654"]

Obviously a bad idea, so bad that the person who thought it up should not be allowed to think for himself ever again.

I understand the used games issue when looking at how GS handles them, buying back new games and selling them used for only $5 less, thats too extreme and GS is taking advantage of many people, but again its those people's right to be dumb and do that.

What I dont like is the effect on rentals. I am sorry but rentals have been a part of every form of media entertainment, why should gaming get a free pass. What the hell is he talking about them making no money from rentals, how do you think the stores got all those copies in, THEY BOUGHT THEM.

The simple solution is for these companies to start selling this stuff directly, allow people to rent from the company, allow them to sell it back and the company have a used section.

VMan

I'm sure something of that nature will eventually cross many publishers' minds if it hasn't so already. But I think it'll just come down to ever-increasing emphasis on digital distribution. *pukes*

and that will open the door to piracy.

which will bring developers attempting to make a counter-measure

which will probably screw the only people that actually matters, fans who buy the game.

"way more than twice as many people played Gears than bought it."

rragnaar

Untrue, of course... if you own a copy of Gears, you most likely paid for it, you just didn't pay a retailer.

I don't like where this is going. If you buy a product, it should certainly be in your rights to sell it.

On an unrelated note, the ending to Gears of War 2 sure isn't worth $20, it practically plays itself. ;)

If this ever were to happen I would call boycott!!

Wow. Paying to see the ending or to fight the final boss and charging $20 for it. :?

I'm speechless just thinking about it.:|

So will each giant in Shadow of the Colossus 2 be $20 bucks each?

Thread title is extremely misleading, eye catching, (as was the intention, no doubt) but misleading all the same.CronoSquall

I know, and I knew this when I made it. If someone wants to propose a better thread title, I'm up for it. My main job was getting people to click on the thread.

See this is the kind of thing that will just encourage piracy. I at least know I would never buy a game that does this, no matter what game it is.

Also this might explain the last boss of Gears 2...

Toyota, Honda and other car manufacturer should be mad about used car sales, after all, they designed the car and built it, but they don't see the money if a car is sold again in the used market.

Same can be said about books, dvd´s, blu-rays, VHS, LP, furniture,... all these products that the manufacturer, designers, writers, directors,... have put so much effort in doing and they only see about a half of the money that they could be doing because of the used market.

Seriously, used markets is almost as old as human kind, I don't know why the gaming industry is so averse to it

i'm telling you. we are not far from people who buy used games, being put in the same boat is pirates.Chogyam

That's because they are essentially the same to the developers.  

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]i'm telling you. we are not far from people who buy used games, being put in the same boat is pirates.ReddestSkies

That's because they are essentially the same to the developers.  

No, there is a difference to them: they can take legal action against pirates, albeit indirect and ineffective.

Being that Japan outlawed the secondary market a long time ago, I'm amazed it's taken this long for the western market to have this issue come up.

That being said, if they really wanted to destroy the secondary market, then the DLC idea would work beautifully.  Band together as an industry.  Package the ending download codes with games, and don't make endings available for purchase at all.  It'd be the Rock Band 2 bonus content taken to an even greater extreme - if you pay less, and don't pay us, you don't get all the content, period.  Games would lose all their aftermarket value very quickly, and even rarities (this part really makes me smile) would have to have a non-activated code included in order to be eBayable.  Anything to stick it to the collector, I say.

Honestly, the only thing that bothers me about this trend is that I have a good friend locally who has been in the used game business for the upside of 20 years now, and he would get bent over pretty bad by this development.

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]i'm telling you. we are not far from people who buy used games, being put in the same boat is pirates.Video_Game_King

That's because they are essentially the same to the developers.  

No, there is a difference to them: they can take legal action against pirates, albeit indirect and ineffective.

I think you kinda missed the point.  He/she's saying pirates and used game buyers are essentially the same to developers in the context that the developers don't get any profit either way (I fully agree BTW).  I mean just look at it all this whining in the big picture.  Like I said earlier, its just them shifting their whining from piracy to this.  They're whining over the same thing, they're just pointing at another set of people now.

Being that Japan outlawed the secondary market a long time ago, I'm amazed it's taken this long for the western market to have this issue come up.

DarkCatalyst

You mean that people can't buy used games? Cause there is a huge market for used games in Japan. I've seen it with my own eyes.

wow, what a load of BS!

But it's business, and all businessmen are money hungry Dbags.

S0lidSnake

Are you going to be in a buisness of some sort someday? If so, would you consider yourself a dbag? everyone has to be a part of some business some day.... or you could just move to Iran. Open thy mind.