What way should the next gen tackle used games piracy, rental market?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Ravenlore_basic (3933 posts) -

RIGHT now it cost a lot to make a big budget game, if the game flops even though it get critical acclaim, money is lost people get laid off and Game Studios close.  This effect not only the developer, and publisher, but other games that are going to come out as INVESTORS do not want to take a risk on such endeavors.  Thus, well know games that carry less risk will get more capital investment, and publisher approval. IN THE END its all about making the investors, and Publishers a PROFIT.

Going forward IF games are to use more assets such as: Voice acting, better graphics, body capturing, AI, Physics, Writing, level design,... ETC then Like movie budgets the cost will increase.  How will such increases be paid for?

Right now there are more ways to buy a game used than ever before and MORE easily than before. Gamestop has made Billions over the years and now Bestbuy, Target are getting in on the  used game market, and Cregslist, Amazon and Ebay as well as other used game sites sale used games. Gamefly is starting to increase in is base. In the end Used games are being sold and resold at a volume that was UNTHINKABLE previously. 

The games market has shifted as more ways to play games have started to catch on. Ipad, smartphones... are starting to take off selling billions of pieces of content. In addition casual games have started to sale more than HC games and so a shift in focus is accordanly. 

 

SO what is going to happen? How will games evolve is there is not enough money in the industry given all the pressures to make a profit.  

 

Now on the bright side IF developers are able to make their profits from used game sales almost as much as they do with new sales, I HOPE THAT publishers,  will have the stomach to innovate with more Hardcore RPG, Action, and stratagy games, along with some NEW IP that is different. 

#2 Posted by psymon100 (6138 posts) -

I would much rather see a focus on creating a large number of smaller titles which are all quite different rather than a few blockbusters. 

Large projects probably have got the biggest earning potential. But consider Kingdoms of Amalur. In my opinion this was not managed well. Far far too risky to jump in with such a huge budget on a new intellectual property. All the eggs were in one basket and it flopped. 

Also, some simple advice - don't hire celebrities like Tom Hanks, or one of the Baldwins to be the voice actor. That must be prohibitively expensive. Instead, go for a professional voice acter. They can cover multiple characters and they don't hemmorage as much money. I bet that Baldwin wasn't cheap, and how much did he improve Mass Effect 2 relative to a bloke like say Fred Tatasciore?

#3 Posted by BPoole96 (22784 posts) -

Probably go the route of CD Keys. Console gamers are already used to having to put in codes in order to unlock the Online portions of their games or Day one DLC that came as a pre order bonus.

I think this would be the best way to go about it as long as the code was tied to your account so if you had to get a new console, the code would already be registered on your username and oyu wouldn't have to rebuy the game.

#4 Posted by Ravenlore_basic (3933 posts) -

an explanation of each 

1. if the games are locked and there is a charge for transfer of said game then I hope that prices would come down.  Les DLC content would be used. 

2. If games are left as is then the cost of games may go to $100.00 per game.  This would get them profits but at the cost of selling less games.  The focus on Piracy would bbe for every choice but HERE the focus would come at a higher cost as using more powe from the console and updatable and changeable, (thus more than PS3 core cost at 1/7 power devoted to anti-piracy) 

3. Apple makes its profits from selling the devices and they make a HUGE profit for just that aspect.  Microsoft and Sony could then instead of losing money from the sale of every console charge a price that they make a profit from the very begining and delaying price dorps, reaping futher profit down the line.  They would then NOT NEED to increase the price of games and charge LESS IN ROYALTIES to publishers, and developers. 

4. Striping games down to a single content way to play.  Some people never use the online mode, or CO-OP, or play aginst other players an so can save some money by not having that as part of the game. The price would not drop it would stil be $60.00 for a game but just less of a game to pay for those wanting more would have to pay for more.

 

5. Each game can be big (Skyrim) while others smaller, in this case every game would be a lot shorter and could be eposidoc in nature.  Then if people want more there would be the next part of the game or DLC to add to the game. 

 

6. The consoles could be Digital Distrubution only and become like Steam?? 

#5 Posted by DarkLink77 (31695 posts) -

There is no way to beat piracy. It's impossible. You cannot build DRM that pirates will not crack because they have an unlimited amount of time to do so, and they are far more invested in cracking that DRM than than a company is in building it. All that sort of DRM does is dick over your legitimate consumers.

You probably won't beat the second-hand market until everything is completely reliant on DD, either, and that's not going to happen for a long time. I know I personally will not support a console that does not allow me to do what I want with physical media.

What this gen hopefully will do, however, is see an increase in indie development and an increase in mid-tier games and studios. The former is pretty much guarunteed to happen, but the latter might not. And if it doesn't, we will see more studios closed next gen than ever before.

#6 Posted by Ly_the_Fairy (8652 posts) -

If I was a publisher my concern would be to not negatively affect legitimate buyers.

I'd release all my games DRM-free, and rest-assured knowing that nobody who would buy my games is not buying it because of piracy.

#7 Posted by lamprey263 (22787 posts) -
treat the games like licensed software that requires registration
#8 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38208 posts) -

The more you try to prevent piracy the harder they will push to bypass it. Crackers live for this stuff and there is not one single way you can stop them from doing it. It's literally impossible to stop piracy completely.Best thing you can hope to do is lessen it by making a pretty great game that people would gladly pay for

#9 Posted by k2theswiss (16598 posts) -

IF they going do it. I think they should do something like online pass.

Allow X days Then you have to pay $x

#10 Posted by Ravenlore_basic (3933 posts) -

Piracy is a game of Cat and mouse.  IF the system is updatable then you can stop it at each year but YES at a cost.  The power it takes away from the console, and how much it cost each year to continually update the system focusing on piracy prevention. 

But it can be done.  Locking each game to the account/console is one step that will add to knowing who has a legit copy of a game. MS has used such policys to better protect windows from being copied.  THIS would just be 2 parts to a HUGE plan. 

#11 Posted by MrYaotubo (2606 posts) -

There is no way to beat piracy. It's impossible. You cannot build DRM that pirates will not crack because they have an unlimited amount of time to do so, and they are far more invested in cracking that DRM than than a company is in building it. All that sort of DRM does is dick over your legitimate consumers.

DarkLink77

Diablo 3 has been out for almost a year now,is there a even barely decent pirated version of the game available? I don´t think there is.

#12 Posted by Shenmue_Jehuty (5207 posts) -

TC drank the "Oh, look at us poor ol'developers" cool-aid. . . 

#13 Posted by k2theswiss (16598 posts) -

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

There is no way to beat piracy. It's impossible. You cannot build DRM that pirates will not crack because they have an unlimited amount of time to do so, and they are far more invested in cracking that DRM than than a company is in building it. All that sort of DRM does is dick over your legitimate consumers.

MrYaotubo

Diablo 3 has been out for almost a year now,is there a even barely decent pirated version of the game available? I don´t think there is.

i hear it's soo bad of a game no one wants take the project on lol
#14 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8099 posts) -

All of those options are terrible. The more you charge, the more piracy there is going to be.

#15 Posted by Shewgenja (8338 posts) -

If I was a publisher my concern would be to not negatively affect legitimate buyers.

I'd release all my games DRM-free, and rest-assured knowing that nobody who would buy my games is not buying it because of piracy.

Ly_the_Fairy
This. Gaming has grown into such a big business. I don't see the appeal to the suits to want to create hostility with the customers. Nothing needs to be done. Nothing needs to be changed. How many products actually go through such lengths to ensure a single user? DRM is anticonsumer. No ifs ands or buts.
#16 Posted by funsohng (27537 posts) -
How PC and Steam did it: strong, sexy DD market system where the customers actually want to buy new games.
#17 Posted by MrYaotubo (2606 posts) -
[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

There is no way to beat piracy. It's impossible. You cannot build DRM that pirates will not crack because they have an unlimited amount of time to do so, and they are far more invested in cracking that DRM than than a company is in building it. All that sort of DRM does is dick over your legitimate consumers.

k2theswiss

Diablo 3 has been out for almost a year now,is there a even barely decent pirated version of the game available? I don´t think there is.

i hear it's soo bad of a game no one wants take the project on lol

Well you heard wrong because it´s actually a pretty great game and hackers sure have tried to crack it(I mean,it´s one of the biggest games in the industry)but so far,no real sucess.
#18 Posted by DarkLink77 (31695 posts) -

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

There is no way to beat piracy. It's impossible. You cannot build DRM that pirates will not crack because they have an unlimited amount of time to do so, and they are far more invested in cracking that DRM than than a company is in building it. All that sort of DRM does is dick over your legitimate consumers.

MrYaotubo

Diablo 3 has been out for almost a year now,is there a even barely decent pirated version of the game available? I don´t think there is.

I don't know, but always-online isn't the answer.
#19 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -
How do you pirate used games?
#20 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18331 posts) -
None of the things listed.. they should make quality products that make people WANT to give their money to the devs. Disasters like Aliens (which then comes out showing shady tactics by the devs to take your money by showing off fake content before release) has the opposite effect.
#21 Posted by Ly_the_Fairy (8652 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ly_the_Fairy"]

If I was a publisher my concern would be to not negatively affect legitimate buyers.

I'd release all my games DRM-free, and rest-assured knowing that nobody who would buy my games is not buying it because of piracy.

Shewgenja

This. Gaming has grown into such a big business. I don't see the appeal to the suits to want to create hostility with the customers. Nothing needs to be done. Nothing needs to be changed. How many products actually go through such lengths to ensure a single user? DRM is anticonsumer. No ifs ands or buts.

That's mainly it.

DRM is a good way to keep people from becoming fans of your games.

I've got a friend who can't access his copy of Far Cry 3 because of uplay is being a big butt, and won't let him access it. What's sad is that Far Cry 3 looks to be the embodiment of everything my friend loves in games, but he won't ever get the chance to know.

#22 Posted by MrYaotubo (2606 posts) -
[QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

There is no way to beat piracy. It's impossible. You cannot build DRM that pirates will not crack because they have an unlimited amount of time to do so, and they are far more invested in cracking that DRM than than a company is in building it. All that sort of DRM does is dick over your legitimate consumers.

DarkLink77

Diablo 3 has been out for almost a year now,is there a even barely decent pirated version of the game available? I don´t think there is.

I don't know, but always-online isn't the answer.

That very well may be,but it´s the kind of drm pirates cannot crack,not effectively at least.
#23 Posted by HaloPimp978 (7249 posts) -

All of those options are terrible. The more you charge, the more piracy there is going to be.

sherman-tank1

This all of your opitions are terrible TC so I didn't vote for one single one.

#24 Posted by Ly_the_Fairy (8652 posts) -

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="MrYaotubo"]

Diablo 3 has been out for almost a year now,is there a even barely decent pirated version of the game available? I don´t think there is.

MrYaotubo

I don't know, but always-online isn't the answer.

That very well may be,but it´s the kind of drm pirates cannot crack,not effectively at least.

And what would happen if it was cracked?

Diablo 2 sold millions of copies, and was still played by millions of users over Battle.net up until the Diablo 3 launch.

Does anyone doubt that Diablo 3 would have sold less without DRM given how monstrous Blizzard's brand recognition has gotten since the year 2000? Instead they had to go about inconviniencing millions of gamers who trusted Blizzard, through buying their product, that they'd get access to a game anytime they wanted to play it.

I know a couple Blizzard fans who bought Diablo 3, and have the box on display as a reminder to why they should always research games before they buy them no matter who the developer is. 

#25 Posted by Rockman999 (7232 posts) -

Keep the online passes.

#26 Posted by Ravenlore_basic (3933 posts) -

TC drank the "Oh, look at us poor ol'developers" cool-aid. . . 

Shenmue_Jehuty

I wouold just like to know from people what should developers, publishers, and console makers do to make a profit?   THAT is why they make games.  

#27 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8099 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

TC drank the "Oh, look at us poor ol'developers" cool-aid. . . 

Ravenlore_basic

I wouold just like to know from people what should developers, publishers, and console makers do to make a profit?   THAT is why they make games.  

Increasing prices won't help. People would just want to pirate more.

#28 Posted by Ravenlore_basic (3933 posts) -

All of those options are terrible. The more you charge, the more piracy there is going to be.

sherman-tank1

Then the way around it is to charge more for the console if they sell consoles like if APPLE made a console making a profit of $100.00 per console  SO if a console cost $300.00 to make and they made $100.00 then they would sell the console for $400.00.  that would represent 1/4 of the cost or 25% 

Then the console makers would not need to relay on Profits form games sold. They could reduce the price they charge publishers for games. Thus reducing the price of the game, as well. 

#29 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8099 posts) -

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]

All of those options are terrible. The more you charge, the more piracy there is going to be.

Ravenlore_basic

Then the way around it is to charge more for the console if they sell consoles like if APPLE made a console making a profit of $100.00 per console  SO if a console cost $300.00 to make and they made $100.00 then they would sell the console for $400.00.  that would represent 1/4 of the cost or 25% 

Then the console makers would not need to relay on Profits form games sold. They could reduce the price they charge publishers for games. Thus reducing the price of the game, as well. 

That is all fine and dandy, but I don't think that worked well with the PS3.

#30 Posted by Ravenlore_basic (3933 posts) -

[QUOTE="Ravenlore_basic"]

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]

All of those options are terrible. The more you charge, the more piracy there is going to be.

sherman-tank1

Then the way around it is to charge more for the console if they sell consoles like if APPLE made a console making a profit of $100.00 per console  SO if a console cost $300.00 to make and they made $100.00 then they would sell the console for $400.00.  that would represent 1/4 of the cost or 25% 

Then the console makers would not need to relay on Profits form games sold. They could reduce the price they charge publishers for games. Thus reducing the price of the game, as well. 

That is all fine and dandy, but I don't think that worked well with the PS3.

The PS3 lost money.  Had the charged more and never lost the BIllions they did just by selling the console they would not be in the situration they are in now.  

#31 Posted by sherman-tank1 (8099 posts) -

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]

[QUOTE="Ravenlore_basic"]

Then the way around it is to charge more for the console if they sell consoles like if APPLE made a console making a profit of $100.00 per console  SO if a console cost $300.00 to make and they made $100.00 then they would sell the console for $400.00.  that would represent 1/4 of the cost or 25% 

Then the console makers would not need to relay on Profits form games sold. They could reduce the price they charge publishers for games. Thus reducing the price of the game, as well. 

Ravenlore_basic

That is all fine and dandy, but I don't think that worked well with the PS3.

The PS3 lost money.  Had the charged more and never lost the BIllions they did just by selling the console they would not be in the situration they are in now.  

I don't know, I don't think that would of worked. The gaming industry has a lot of competition, casuals would not buy the PS3 if the 360 was around half the price.

#32 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16744 posts) -
I don't care what they do. I just know I won't buy a console that blocks used games.
#33 Posted by LordQuorthon (5264 posts) -

Once you beat the game, the disc destroys itself. I'm sure you system warriors are willing to take one for the team, right? 

 

 

#34 Posted by clyde46 (44021 posts) -

[QUOTE="sherman-tank1"]

All of those options are terrible. The more you charge, the more piracy there is going to be.

Ravenlore_basic

Then the way around it is to charge more for the console if they sell consoles like if APPLE made a console making a profit of $100.00 per console  SO if a console cost $300.00 to make and they made $100.00 then they would sell the console for $400.00.  that would represent 1/4 of the cost or 25% 

Then the console makers would not need to relay on Profits form games sold. They could reduce the price they charge publishers for games. Thus reducing the price of the game, as well. 

Sony, MS and Ninty don't have a say in how much games cost. The publishers do and that is why we are paying £40+ for a 6 hour game.
#35 Posted by crimsonman1245 (4253 posts) -

Very easy.

Pre-order gets all DLC and future DLC for free

New copy gets all day 1 DLC

Used copy gets no DLC/online pass.

#36 Posted by Zeviander (9503 posts) -
Make games people want to buy.
#38 Posted by LordQuorthon (5264 posts) -

Make games people want to buy.Zeviander

And keep. Buy and keep.

Remember when people didn't run to sell their games the day after they beat them? That wasn't too long ago, kids. A smart industry composed of talented and sensible individuals instead of wannabe "artists" would understand that the fact that something that a few years ago didn't really happen that often came to become an issue now is THEIR fault. And smart consumers would demand a solution that actually takes care of the problem, a solution that implies having a selection of video games that they actually want to keep, instead of trying to squeeze more money out of them while treating them like felons.

The only thing that's keeping this now worthless industry alive is that some of you dumbtards are far too stupid to understand how bad those companies are screwing you over. But even that has to end, even if it's because of some sort of neckbeard black plague or something. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

#39 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16744 posts) -
I just read all the options in the poll and :lol: total fail. Every option would hurt the console makers or the devs/publishers. Option 1=nobody buys the console. Option 2=nobody buys games at release and force a price drop and more buy used than what we have now. Option 3=Console and games sell at a snail's pace and price drops are forced again to move merchandise. Option 4=The singleplayer would ways have to be awesome for the game to sell. Multiplayer all buy dies. Option 5=Games wouldn't sell because they wouldn't be worth the price because it is a barebone game that nobody wants.
#40 Posted by MrGeezer (56041 posts) -

[QUOTE="Shenmue_Jehuty"]

TC drank the "Oh, look at us poor ol'developers" cool-aid. . . 

Ravenlore_basic

I wouold just like to know from people what should developers, publishers, and console makers do to make a profit?   THAT is why they make games.  

Make better games. Market the games better. Use their budgets wisely. Make smart business decisions, like not releasing games during a time when the competition is particularly strong. Look, I'm not going to pretend that piracy and used sales aren't an issue, but the biggest issue is competition against other publishers. Walk down to the local store and see how many games they have on display. How many are you EVER going to potentially buy? One? Two? Five? The bottom line is that pretty much EVERY consumer is only going to buy a very very small percentage of the games that get released. This is regardless of piracy, regardless of Gamestop. The biggest issue is that due to money (games can be expensive) and time (a hell of a lot of people just don't have time to do a lot of gaming even if they have the money), there is simply a limit on how many games people will buy. The biggest hindrance to making a profit is to fail to effectively compete with the other games (new or used, it doesn't matter) on the market. The companies that fail are either spending too much money, or not spending enough money, or spending their money on the wrong things, or marketing their products poorly, or failing to please their fanbase, etc. In other words, the companies that fail are the companies that aren't very good at being in the game business. And that's really the only real answer to being successful and turning a profit. Get better at making games that people want to play, get better at operating as a business. Don't get me wrong, I loathe piracy, but it's here to stay. And if piracy or used games are the difference between failure and success then those developers are already walking on thin ice. Before resorting to measures that are potentially gonna piss off the fans who they DO have, they should be focusing on just plain running their companies better. Start with making better games, fixing your budgets, and giving people an incentive to buy your games over the competition's.
#41 Posted by MrGeezer (56041 posts) -

The PS3 lost money.  Had the charged more and never lost the BIllions they did just by selling the console they would not be in the situration they are in now.  

Ravenlore_basic
If they charged more for the PS3 and sold it without a loss, no one would have bought it. They'd have sold so few units that support for the console would be nearly nonexistent and then Sony wouldn't be making money off of games. Hell, even being sold at a loss, look how poorly the PS3 was doing before it started getting price cuts. It was expensive as hell, and way too many gamers just weren't willing to pay those prices. How do you think that would have worked out if the PS3 was even MORE expensive so that the consoles weren't being sold at a loss?
#42 Posted by Joedgabe (5092 posts) -

 i'm pretty sure that piracy isn't what's ruining the market. Piracy has kinda always been there yet there has been it's ups and downs. People just don't want to sit down to play video games or spend 40 - 60 dollars on games when they're busy with other things. In fact some people that even buy games don't have the time to finish them but still buy them to support developers.

#43 Posted by nextgenjoke (2123 posts) -

Developers should ship their games without copy protection and see how the numbers do on major releases lol i bet they still sell decent. Developers turned into money hungry sell outs like cliffy.b lol he get's his lambo and rides off into the sunset LOL.

#44 Posted by jg4xchamp (47063 posts) -
I would like them to not tackle used games/rentals. This industry does enough things to dick over its userbase so I don't get why gamers would want to get their right to buy a game cheaper or rent be taken away?
#45 Posted by nextgenjoke (2123 posts) -

shareware days was alot better pay like 5$ for like quake shareware disk at gamestop and if you wanted the full game just order it from dev.

Was better than laying down 60$ on a game you might not like.

#46 Posted by nextgenjoke (2123 posts) -

not enough demos are being released today they just expect you to lay down 60$ like it's nothing atleast with shareware they basically make a few bucks from releasing a damn demo aka shareware.

#47 Posted by James161324 (8315 posts) -

The most common would be the steam verision. You have  a key and that key is tied to the account. 

#48 Posted by nextgenjoke (2123 posts) -

Where's my aliens colonial marines demo?