Is it immoral to buy used games?

Lately, there's a lot of talk about the problems the used games market poses for developers. If news sites are to be believed, devs have even been releasing DLC in order to thwart the trend of people selling back their games to places like GameStop.

When stores sell a used game, none of the profit goes to the dev. It seems to follow that if games weren't traded in or at least weren't resold, more money would be in devs' pockets because people would buy new copies instead. That makes sense when you're personally confronted with the choice between buying the new or used copy sitting on the store shelf; if you weren't to buy the used copy or if it didn't exist, the dev would get more money.

However, looking at the bigger picture, what if people who trade in games buy new games at a faster rate than those who don't trade in their new games? If getting money back from a store makes them more inclined to purchase games, then the used games market could possibly be indirectly putting more money in devs' pockets.

Still, I always feel a little guilty when I buy games used. Since the dev isn't getting the money, it doesn't seem significantly different from illegally downloading games (that the dev isn't getting paid for their work is generally the argument brought up against illegal downloading.)

What do you think? Is it wrong to buy used games? Keep in mind that its legality or any relevant Rights & Freedoms are irrelevant to its morality; not all immoral things are illegal, and not all legal things are moral.

TC, all I can say is Wow, just Wow at this topic....

Why would it be wrong to buy used games?!?!?!?

What do you think? Is it wrong to buy used games?

clicketyclick

No, I don't think buying used games is immoral, but charging $70 for them sure is.

The guy who compared buying used games to buying a used car pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Besides, what's the average person gonna do: shell out $50 to $60 for a new game, or $20 to $30 max for the same thing, but with the case opened? If games were cheaper, people would be less inclined to go for the used copies.

I've bought some used games and it's simply the publishers fault for not printing enough copies. Their loss.Nifty_Shark

The issue is usually not a lack of new copies. Most buy used games simply because they're cheaper.

Bioshock was a very popular game, but now you can not find a new copy of a game unless you go online, and even then it is usually from a private seller (therefore the developer is still not getting any money). So maybe if the developer made it easier to get new copies of games, people would not always be buying used copies of games.Adoxx

I don't find that to be true where I live at least. In any case, you're basically saying, if it is difficult to pay the dev for a copy of the game, then it is moral to obtain the game without paying the dev. However, you will not, I am sure, be willing to say that it is moral to illegally download hard-to-find old games. So can you really use that as a reason why buying used games is moral? You can't make a case of Necessity here.

No, There's a used market for everything and no one complains. Games shouldn't be any different.BuryMe

Perhaps the used market for other products is wrong too. If so, they shouldn't be treated any different. But first we need to establish whether or not it is wrong to buy used games. But whether or not people complain about something is not indicative of the morality of it; you didn't provide a reason why buying used games is moral.

I do buy used games but just to complete my PS2 collection.

[QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]I've bought some used games and it's simply the publishers fault for not printing enough copies. Their loss.clicketyclick

The issue is usually not a lack of new copies. Most buy used games simply because they're cheaper.

Bioshock was a very popular game, but now you can not find a new copy of a game unless you go online, and even then it is usually from a private seller (therefore the developer is still not getting any money). So maybe if the developer made it easier to get new copies of games, people would not always be buying used copies of games.Adoxx

I don't find that to be true where I live at least. In any case, you're basically saying, if it is difficult to pay the dev for a copy of the game, then it is moral to obtain the game without paying the dev. However, you will not, I am sure, be willing to say that it is moral to illegally download hard-to-find old games. So can you really use that as a reason why buying used games is moral? You can't make a case of Necessity here.

No, There's a used market for everything and no one complains. Games shouldn't be any different.BuryMe

Perhaps the used market for other products is wrong too. If so, they shouldn't be treated any different. But first we need to establish whether or not it is wrong to buy used games. But whether or not people complain about something is not indicative of the morality of it; you didn't provide a reason why buying used games is moral.

there is nothing immoral about it. it is moral to buy a used game because one person does not want it anymore. he would benefit from some more money. the other person wants the game. he has extra money. both people are satisfied. the developer got their money on the original sale. they have been wronged in no way. some people do not find a $60 game to be a good value and probably would not have bought the game at all if they didnt get it cheaper used.

The used game market is definitely bad for the developers. It literally steals legitimate sales. It doesn't matter if it is "moral" or not, really. At the end of the day, you should always be supporting the developers, not Gamestop and that cheap guy who wanted the extra $2 or whatever ridiculously low price that retailers buy used game for.ReddestSkies

this is absurd. you have no way of knowing if people would ever buy the game at full retail cost. i sure wouldnt buy a lot of the games i buy used at new price

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]The used game market is definitely bad for the developers. It literally steals legitimate sales. It doesn't matter if it is "moral" or not, really. At the end of the day, you should always be supporting the developers, not Gamestop and that cheap guy who wanted the extra $2 or whatever ridiculously low price that retailers buy used game for.OneWingedAngeI

this is absurd. you have no way of knowing if people would ever buy the game at full retail cost. i sure wouldnt buy a lot of the games i buy used at new price

Waiting for the games to drop in price seems like the best middle ground.

Besides, what's the average person gonna do: shell out $50 to $60 for a new game, or $20 to $30 max for the same thing, but with the case opened? If games were cheaper, people would be less inclined to go for the used copies.

Ugotownedo

The premise of this thread is that the average person is buying games used. The question is whether they should be doing that, not whether they are. And the price doesn't justify the act; illegally downloading games and apps is just as immoral when they're expensive as when they cost $5.

there is nothing immoral about it. it is moral to buy a used game because one person does not want it anymore. he would benefit from some more money. the other person wants the game. he has extra money. both people are satisfied. the developer got their money on the original sale. they have been wronged in no way. some people do not find a $60 game to be a good value and probably would not have bought the game at all if they didnt get it cheaper used.

OneWingedAngeI

That last sentence is a really astute point and another reason why the used game market may actually not be a detriment to devs - it IS an assumption to say that a person who bought a game used would have necessarily bought it new had they been unable to buy it used. However, the same thing can be (and has been) said about illegal downloading. Yet that is still immoral, regardless. What accounts for that?

As for the first part of your post, the way they were wronged, it could be argued, is that people are experiencing their work and their services (in an online game) without paying THEM for it. There is something, I think, we find disturbing in people profiting from others' work. Even if you paid for an essay in the first place, you shouldn't claim it as your own and submit it to the teacher, profiting by getting mark in return for it. It wasn't your work.

Well, that's my initial intuition about it at least. I'll probably be able to come up with a more thoughtful explanation through more discussion.

The used game market has provided me with the ability to play a lot more games then I would have ever been able to. I own very few games because after a few weeks or months depending on the game I sell them. I then use that money to buy another game. I sometimes buy new and sometimes I buy used depending on the title. Using this method I have been buying 2 or 3 games a month for quite sometime (which has slowed down the last few months because my wife went back to school and isn't working anymore. . .so money is TIGHT).

If I didn't have the ability to sell my games I would have a lot less cash flow not to mention I would take a lot less chances on a new title. Right now an average new game cost me around $40 bucks or less after I trade it in or sell it to a friend. I take chances a quite a few titles that I wouldn't have paid $60 bucks for, but 30 or 40 seems much more reasonable to me.

A game is really no different then any other object bought or sold. Used cars are a perfect example. A lot of people factor in resale value when buying a new car and with games I do the very same thing. If buying or selling used games is immoral then garage sales, flea markets and ebay are all immoral also.

Well if you no longer have use for a game and it's just going to sit around never being played for ages, it's just wasting space. So you can either keep it and try to squeeze room for something you never use, or you can bin it. But why waste a game that someone else can enjoy? Especially when you can cash in on the game by selling it/trading it in?

How is this relevent? If you couldn't buy 2nd hand games then alot of games would just be thrown away or be rotting in someones attic/cupboard when it could be sold to someone else for it to get even more play out of it.

Whats immoral is the stores that sell 2nd hand games nearing the price of a new game.

Is it morally wrong to buy a used car? Of course not. I've bought some used games and it's simply the publishers fault for not printing enough copies. Their loss.Nifty_Shark

No, There's a used market for everything and no one complains. Games shouldn't be any different.BuryMe

The guy who compared buying used games to buying a used car pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Ugotownedo

A game is really no different then any other object bought or sold. Used cars are a perfect example. A lot of people factor in resale value when buying a new car and with games I do the very same thing. If buying or selling used games is immoral then garage sales, flea markets and ebay are all immoral also.

joshuarocker

It's wrong if you buy from a company like Gamestop. Go somewhere else like Amazon/Ebay for used. Gun-Kata

they are a really good source for older PS2 games though. Most of which don't exceed 10 dollars.

I agree with you on that. I think it's immoral how people are selling used games on ebay and watching people go on bidding wars just get an old game they should have got when it was releashed. I buy used games of different titles for myself. I always feel bad for a used game that's just sitting because no one wants it. Also used games help others buy more games in the future.g1rldraco7

What if they were unable to?

First of all, why is it some moral imperative that we pay the developer for their game? Most transactions involving used products put zero money in the manufacturer's pocket, so a case would have to be made against the resale of used items in general, which would be completely ridiculous. Those with little money need their thrift stores, for example.

Second, the analogy of buying used to illegally downloading is flawed for the following reason: with console and handheld games, at least, there are limited copies of the game in circulation, so not only is someone paying for the physical product, but that person is also paying for the transfer of the licence to play the game from the seller. The total number of people able to play the game remains constant. With illegal downloads, there is no limit to the number of copies in circulation and there is no transference. The number of people able to play can increase without bound, without a dime going to the developer for additional copies obtained.

Thought experiment time. Consider two groups of people: one has bought all the copies of a game that have been produced, and the other wants these copies of the game, but doesn't have any. Each copy of the game was purchased already. The money already went to the developer. Let's say that the used market exists and the second group bought all the copies of the aforementioned game from the first group. If it is said that the developer should get money out of this transaction, it would be the case that consumers are, in total, paying the developer more than the total price of all the copies of the game. This is not a pay-for-ownership model of business.

Asking whether buying used should be made illegal looks to me like the question of whether or not all game business should take place under a pay-for-use model instead of a pay-for-ownership model. Why should that be the case?

Well if you no longer have use for a game and it's just going to sit around never being played for ages, it's just wasting space. So you can either keep it and try to squeeze room for something you never use, or you can bin it. But why waste a game that someone else can enjoy? Especially when you can cash in on the game by selling it/trading it in?

EquiIibrium

This is another good point. You could even say that selling games used for cheap that would have otherwise been just collecting dust can introduce new people to quality gaming (who would otherwise buy new shovelware for that same price), or at least, introduce gamers to a franchise they haven't tried before. And if that franchise is still alive, it could make them want to buy the new sequel coming out, when they wouldn't have before.

On the other hand, such an argument requires belief that there is something inherently wrong about hogging a game that you no longer play and have no use for while others could make much better use of it than you (something like a socialist Game Redistribution principle.) I find this hard to swallow, because I think being a game collector is not wrong.

a case would have to be made against the resale of used items in general, which would be completely ridiculous. Those with little money need their thrift stores, for example.Angry_Beaver

As HardQuor pointed out, other used-product industries are different in that cars and clothing experience degradation. They're simply not in as good condition as when bought new. This is not the case for games. This is morally relevant because it justifies the lower resale price. With games though, the price is just competitively undercutting new games on shelves, to the detriment of the dev.

Another difference with clothing and cars is that you seem to only find them up for resale when the originals are out of print. It's difficult to go to the thrift store and find a shirt that could could currently buy new in the mall. And when you buy a used car, it's last year's model, or maybe from a few years back, which are not being sold anymore in dealerships. This is relevant because they're not competing with the same product, only new.

With illegal downloads, there is no limit to the number of copies in circulation and there is no transference. The number of people able to play can increase without bound, without a dime going to the developer for additional copies obtained.Angry_Beaver

I recognise that this is a difference, but I don't see how it is any more morally relevant than the colour of the game case each would be in. How many people who can play without paying the dev is not at issue; it's whether any of them are justified in doing so. If something is wrong, the number of people doing it doesn't make it any more or less wrong. It just makes it more or less of a problem.

Thought experiment time. Consider two groups of people...Angry_Beaver

There are two flaws with your experiment. First, if it is true that buying games is immoral, paying the dev for used game purchases is only one possible response, and one that I disagree with for the reasons you mentioned. But because it's only one possible response, it doesn't show that buying used games is moral. Here's an alternative: people just don't buy/sell games used. You see, I'm asking what is moral, not what should be legal. Morality need not have legal enforcement.

Second, you're making the static world error. While it's true that a finite number of games will eventually be printed, it's not true that they already have been. Successful games (measured in sales of NEW games) get reprinted (note that buying these games used means that games go out of print sooner.) And financially/critically successful games get reissued as ports, special editions, collector sets, anniversary editions, or downloads. What I'm saying is that usually, the choice is between buying used now or buying new now or in the future.

Devs today are not concerned about buying old games that are out of print and have no way of playing them new. They're concerned about the large industry behind games being sold back soon after release, sitting on shelves beside new copies with $5-10 knocked off the price. And I'm always confronted with the choice of going to the store to buy an in-print-and-available game or buying it cheap off kijiji or ebay.

No, someone has already bought the product, it has entered the consumer's hands. After that, there is no law binding them to keeping the game. They can sell it to whoever they please, including a large retail chain that doesn't give you much money for them, and other people have the right to buy them.-TheSecondSign-

Very well said.

My answer is no. I only buy a game brand new if I really really like the game. If reading reviews and watching videos of the game still can't tell me if it's worth the full price, then I just buy a used copy of it. Renting games doesn't exist here in Philippines.

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"]No, someone has already bought the product, it has entered the consumer's hands. After that, there is no law binding them to keeping the game. They can sell it to whoever they please, including a large retail chain that doesn't give you much money for them, and other people have the right to buy them.skp_16

Very well said.

...

This is a difficult question to answer. I will say that if it is a quality game and has recently been released, you should buy it new to support the game and the people who made it. On the other hand, there is a lot of marketing BS and hype and a lot of people get duped into buying a game under false pretenses(which I consider to be just as immoral). Many games are not worth the standard price of $60 and shouldn't be fully supported by buying them at that price.

I see used games as a more limited/controlled form of piracy in a sense. It's more closely limited to a finite number of copies, but the original makers still aren't seeing any money from it, and as long as the games are cared for they can be resold a many number of times(though the money going to the middleman or an individual does help them). Of course if the game is no longer being sold as new by the creators, then it really makes no difference at all if you buy it used or not.

It's too big a gray area to have a definite answer under, though if it really is such a big issue for game developers then they can try to have a law passed restricting used game sales for a year after the release date. I find that's about the time period on most games until there is a price drop on buying it new anyways.

Or they could just start doing digital only sales, but that would just piss everyone off, myself included.

The money in my pockets is a greater concern to me than the money in the devs. pockets. I don't really see this as a morality issue.getyeryayasout

Funny, I've heard pirates tell me the same thing.

I've always been against buying used games....because i like getting a new game and opening it up for the first time and taking a big whiff of that "New Game Smell!" that comes with each and every game!!! Funny part is im dead serious. :lol:

Definately not in fact I think it makes for a healthy game market. When people go and trade-in games at places like GS they are doing so for other gaming products. Therefore more product gets "sold" because consumers don't necessarily always have to spend cash straight up and the stores make their money from selling the used games and are able to keep product stocked and this keeps the cycle going at it's current pace.Archangel3371

This is, by far, the best and only good argument in favor of a used game market. I'm surprised i didn't see it come up sooner. Or maybe i just missed it? Either way, i'm still on the fence.

Is it morally wrong to buy a used car? Of course not. I've bought some used games and it's simply the publishers fault for not printing enough copies. Their loss.Nifty_Shark

no, its not the publishers fault... its people who think they will get money for thier trade ins.

i barely buy used games if there arn't any copies at the store then i will look at the used section. one reason i don't buy used games is because gamestop charges more then the person who traded it in. another one is that its only $5 savings... i don't care about 5 savings. the new game is $60 the person who traded it in would get 20-30 used and they will sell it for $55....

i think it is kind of wrong to buy used games because of the prices on them. it is to expensive to buy a used game at the rprice they charge it at.