@ZzNashoO - Sorry I was responding to a post from somewhere else. I got confused and entered the comment here by mistake.
- Chickan_117
- Rank: Mishima Zaibatsu
- Member since: Nov 23, 2009
- Last online: 06/17/13 11:19 pm PT
My Achievements:
see more »
My Friends
-
elektrixx online
-
Foolz3h online
-
mjc online
-
Shirokishi_ online
-
jamesh-42 online
-
UnrealLegend online
-
aus_pride online
-
jeditay34 online
-
Ragnarok-64 online
-
Twisted14 online
16Feb 12
This topic is something often discussed and it's a subject I feel very strongly on. It's long so I'll split it into two sections for you:
THE SITUATION
In recent media there has been a focus on the growing concern from developers/publishers about the impact of second hand game sales on their business (i.e. profit).
Whilst second hand video game sales have been around for ages there has never been so much dedicated "physical store" space as there is now. The reason for this is very simple and that's that physical stores make a considerably highermargin on second hand game sales than they do on new.
So what you say? Good on them? Well the problem is that developers/publishers are actively seeking stronger ways of preventing second hand game sales to reduce the impact this has on their business. In other words they are simply trying to reduce second hand game sales as they do not make any money from it and it cuts into their new game sales figures.
Companies have, of course, been doing this for years. PC games have CD keys that are tied to an account, downloadable games are encourages as, generally, they can't be resold, etc. The most recent idea is thatall games will require an online account to play and each copy will have a license that is tied to your account. So, if you buy Medal of Battle Warfare 5 for your Xbox 360 then your copy will be registered to your XBL account. If you try to sell it the other person will be unable to play it as it's tied to your account.
MY OPINION
Personally I think it's wrong of the publishers to try this. It annoyed me when Valve did it with PC games and it annoys me now that others are looking for ways to do the same thing. The only reason they're doing it is because they can. If it weren't for the ability of publishers to force people to go online and register a game before playing then this wouldn't be viable. On a side note many Blu-ray and DVD players are now online so does that mean we can expect future movie releases to be tied to a user account of some kind? All this ends up doing is alienating the user base for the products and, in a way, punishes them for what physical stores are doing.
IMO, If I purchase a game it's the same as me buying a CD, a blu-ray, a car, a house or any other item. I own that physical item and should be able to sell it at a later point if I so desire.
The only difference I see with games is the online component and the cost of maintaining servers. If you see a drop in new game sales then your revenue from a particular game decreases. It's bad business to foot the expense of running online servers when you're not getting new game sales (despite the fact you might be getting new game players).
Personally I think the best way to resolve this issue for publishers and developers is to segregate the online and offline components of a game. If I buy a new copy of game X then they include an online pass type item in the box. A redeemable code underneath some silver scratchie stuff (so EB know I've used it if I trade it in) or something. That way, if I sell my game down the track, the new owner can play all the offline stuff but if he wants the online experience he has to go and purchase a new online pass. Online passes are virtual not physical so this would mean the developers get a continual revenue stream from new players and the players get a good deal because they get their $40 second hand game with the option to play online for $15 or something on top.
The problem with this is that it starts us down the road of publishers forming their own subscription services. Similar toELITE. I don't want to get to a stage where I need to purchase additional annual memberships on top of my base service ones just to be able to play online games. Then again, I rarely play online so, on a personal level, it doesn't really bother me!
The other thing that hasn't been taken into consideration here is that, when people trade in their games, they usually trade them in on a new copy. Stores with a trade for new policy might well be having a more positive effect on game sales than the publishers/developers realise. I know it's that way with second hand car sales.
Anyway that's my solution. The end user is happy as they get to purchase a game cheap second hand and sell their old games. The physical stores are happy as they still get to resell games with a high margin. And the Publisher/Developers are happy-ish as they get continued profits from game sales and a happy user base.
If they continue down the path they're going they're going to end up with reduced sales as gamers are going to be more selective about which games they buy and less likely to impulse trade and get the latest popular thing.
THE QUESTION
What do you think about all this? Is it right for them to restrict second hand sales? What do you think would be a good solution for this?
32 comments
@ZzNashoO - Sorry I was responding to a post from somewhere else. I got confused and entered the comment here by mistake.
I don't quite see how the analogy falls apart. I would mind if someone told me I couldn't sell a car after I had bought it and at the same time I am sure there are people that wouldn't mind if they weren't allowed to sell their car. I own one care where I would be completely fine with the idea of not being able to sell it. In comparison to video games. I would not mind if I were never able to sell my games. They depreciate too much for me to justify it and I always end up wanting to play that game later. At the same time I know people that play a game and are simply done with it. They like to use what value it has towards another game to play. I guess I don't see the flaw in the analogy you are pointing at. :)
I don't quite see how the analogy falls apart. I would mind if someone told me I couldn't sell a car after I had bought it and at the same time I am sure there are people that wouldn't mind if they weren't allowed to sell their car. I own one care where I would be completely fine with the idea of not being able to sell it. In comparison to video games. I would not mind if I were never able to sell my games. They depreciate too much for me to justify it and I always end up wanting to play that game later. At the same time I know people that play a game and are simply done with it. They like to use what value it has towards another game to play. I guess I don't see the flaw in the analogy you are pointing at. :)
@ZzNashoO - The car analogy works to a certain extent but falls apart when you ask someone if they'd mine not being able to resell a car once they bought it :)
@ZzNashoO - The car analogy works to a certain extent but falls apart when you ask someone if they'd mine not being able to resell a car once they bought it :)
Biggest Logical Hold-up: Should we prevent second hand car sales as well? This idea of second hand sales applies to a lot of products in the global market and if applied to something like a car, it makes absolutely no sense. With the new electronic ignition systems on cars prevention of second hand sales would be possible over a period of time. We should be able to purchase any product second hand due to a wide variety of people with different financial situations. I know quite a few people that love gaming but are in a tough financial position and can't do any more than pick up a game for 10 bucks out of the bargain bin. That option should be available. Especially when you scale up to something as expensive as a car. On the flipside of the argument though: Not everyone can afford a porsche. If you can't afford the product that's tough but too bad. Same if someone can't afford a game at $60. Tough. It sounds harsh but it is the way things seem to function when you take a step back. So I can see some justification for both arguments. We are a capitalistic country afterall.
Biggest Logical Hold-up: Should we prevent second hand car sales as well? This idea of second hand sales applies to a lot of products in the global market and if applied to something like a car, it makes absolutely no sense. With the new electronic ignition systems on cars prevention of second hand sales would be possible over a period of time. We should be able to purchase any product second hand due to a wide variety of people with different financial situations. I know quite a few people that love gaming but are in a tough financial position and can't do any more than pick up a game for 10 bucks out of the bargain bin. That option should be available. Especially when you scale up to something as expensive as a car. On the flipside of the argument though: Not everyone can afford a porsche. If you can't afford the product that's tough but too bad. Same if someone can't afford a game at $60. Tough. It sounds harsh but it is the way things seem to function when you take a step back. So I can see some justification for both arguments. We are a capitalistic country afterall.
Its ridiculous... we have second hand sales one everything else... clothes, furniture, etc... why not games? Not everyone can afford $60 a game
Its ridiculous... we have second hand sales one everything else... clothes, furniture, etc... why not games? Not everyone can afford $60 a game
you make a good argument, but I doubt the gaming companies will see it our way until it blows up royally in their faces, which I anticipate once they try it. I, for one, don't buy used games much. But if I pay $60 and don't like it, can I take it back and get a refund or exchange? Of course not, yet they're basically saying, buyer beware and no returns/exchanges - it doesn't paint a pretty picture, does it?
you make a good argument, but I doubt the gaming companies will see it our way until it blows up royally in their faces, which I anticipate once they try it. I, for one, don't buy used games much. But if I pay $60 and don't like it, can I take it back and get a refund or exchange? Of course not, yet they're basically saying, buyer beware and no returns/exchanges - it doesn't paint a pretty picture, does it?
They have the right to do this if they want. I also have the right not to buy. In the end, every counter measure they make to prevent stuff like this just pushes non-addicts further from the games. For example, I won't buy a Ubisoft game anymore. And I'm skipping Mass Effect 3 because of how EA is handling Origin and DLC initiatives to prevent me from selling it. They can take their IP's and stuff it. Indie games don't deal with this trash, make just as fun of games from my perspective, and don't charge $60. I still want devs to be able to turn a profit, but if they can't without going to these measures then I guess they just don't have a product worth making.
They have the right to do this if they want. I also have the right not to buy. In the end, every counter measure they make to prevent stuff like this just pushes non-addicts further from the games. For example, I won't buy a Ubisoft game anymore. And I'm skipping Mass Effect 3 because of how EA is handling Origin and DLC initiatives to prevent me from selling it. They can take their IP's and stuff it. Indie games don't deal with this trash, make just as fun of games from my perspective, and don't charge $60. I still want devs to be able to turn a profit, but if they can't without going to these measures then I guess they just don't have a product worth making.
I'm with you, actually it's surprising to see them talking openly about this without even blushing.
I'm with you, actually it's surprising to see them talking openly about this without even blushing.
In short: No. Look at it this way: I buy a Car, I sell a car. Honda has no right to that car once I buy it and they have no recourse to stop me from selling it or taking that money from me. End argument.
In short: No. Look at it this way: I buy a Car, I sell a car. Honda has no right to that car once I buy it and they have no recourse to stop me from selling it or taking that money from me. End argument.
Publishers that are trying to enforce this fail to see that getting rid of used game sales will end up affecting them even more, as many people will not be willing to try a new game or new franchise at the current price for new games. This may have some gamers to rely on piracy to "try" these games and in the end, not all of them will up buying the game. Besides, if were this were to succeed, it would also affect us as consumers. Since used games are cheaper than new ones (duh!) this helps to lower the price of new copies of a game after some time. Without this, some publishers may decide to not drop the price of their games until the sequel comes out or their next big hit is out. Now, if developers/publishers decide that all games must be tied to an account, then they would be isolating a part of their market as not everyone has a broadband connection. Regarding online passes, I think that's a bad idea as well. Why? Well, imagine having to register a code for every game you purchased in order to be able to play online. Seriously, that is a waste of time. Most people just want to insert their game disc into their console and be able to play right away instead of having to use a controller to type in a 20 digit code (which is actually very uncomfortable). Just my 2 cents.
Publishers that are trying to enforce this fail to see that getting rid of used game sales will end up affecting them even more, as many people will not be willing to try a new game or new franchise at the current price for new games. This may have some gamers to rely on piracy to "try" these games and in the end, not all of them will up buying the game. Besides, if were this were to succeed, it would also affect us as consumers. Since used games are cheaper than new ones (duh!) this helps to lower the price of new copies of a game after some time. Without this, some publishers may decide to not drop the price of their games until the sequel comes out or their next big hit is out. Now, if developers/publishers decide that all games must be tied to an account, then they would be isolating a part of their market as not everyone has a broadband connection. Regarding online passes, I think that's a bad idea as well. Why? Well, imagine having to register a code for every game you purchased in order to be able to play online. Seriously, that is a waste of time. Most people just want to insert their game disc into their console and be able to play right away instead of having to use a controller to type in a 20 digit code (which is actually very uncomfortable). Just my 2 cents.
@Nickosaurus-Rex - Only problem with your online comment is that maintinaing servers is a lot of work for them. If you buy the game, get sick of it, give it to someone else who then plays it and does the same... all that time they're getting no extra funding yet they still have the overhead of maintaining and providing servers.
@Nickosaurus-Rex - Only problem with your online comment is that maintinaing servers is a lot of work for them. If you buy the game, get sick of it, give it to someone else who then plays it and does the same... all that time they're getting no extra funding yet they still have the overhead of maintaining and providing servers.
It does annoy me, because if I spend the money on a game, I feel it belongs to me. The idea that it is just me paying to use their product and I never own it is wrong. If I want to beat a game then lend it to a friend, that's my business. The annoying thing is their total lack of logic in regards to the online system. If I play a game online, I am using their servers. If I sell my game I am no longer using their servers. If someone buys my game down the track, then that person is using my online account instead of me. No extra work for them. Not to mention the fact that we are constantly advertising their games and a lot of the time, if someone likes a game they borrowed, they will buy it themselves. All in all the best way to get rid of 2nd hand sales is to sell your games cheaper to encourage 1st hand sales. Most people will pay an extra $10 or so for a newer game. I can see in the future every single game needing an online connection to play and when that day comes, the gaming industry will truly have us by the balls.
It does annoy me, because if I spend the money on a game, I feel it belongs to me. The idea that it is just me paying to use their product and I never own it is wrong. If I want to beat a game then lend it to a friend, that's my business. The annoying thing is their total lack of logic in regards to the online system. If I play a game online, I am using their servers. If I sell my game I am no longer using their servers. If someone buys my game down the track, then that person is using my online account instead of me. No extra work for them. Not to mention the fact that we are constantly advertising their games and a lot of the time, if someone likes a game they borrowed, they will buy it themselves. All in all the best way to get rid of 2nd hand sales is to sell your games cheaper to encourage 1st hand sales. Most people will pay an extra $10 or so for a newer game. I can see in the future every single game needing an online connection to play and when that day comes, the gaming industry will truly have us by the balls.
Ohh good topic. I think its crap that publish do this. Okay so your not getting a reward or payment when EB sells your game at the 10 dollar cheaper price point when its second hand but as Chickan said its MY game I bought it and paid anywhere from 50 - 100 dollars for the right to play it so i should be able to play it and sell it later ungimped if i want to. I dont trade games in and i tend to not buy many second hand games either but I dont see why suddenly the publishers are crying foul over this. If you want to increase your sales stop publishing the same garbage (COD, BF, AC etc. that they serialise and end up killing (look at Guitar Hero). If you made better games and less just a new coat of paint over an old game and some tweaks then more people would be te game and keep it i feel.
Ohh good topic. I think its crap that publish do this. Okay so your not getting a reward or payment when EB sells your game at the 10 dollar cheaper price point when its second hand but as Chickan said its MY game I bought it and paid anywhere from 50 - 100 dollars for the right to play it so i should be able to play it and sell it later ungimped if i want to. I dont trade games in and i tend to not buy many second hand games either but I dont see why suddenly the publishers are crying foul over this. If you want to increase your sales stop publishing the same garbage (COD, BF, AC etc. that they serialise and end up killing (look at Guitar Hero). If you made better games and less just a new coat of paint over an old game and some tweaks then more people would be te game and keep it i feel.
@Minishdriveby - Awesome userID :) I agree but is that a real issue nowadays? Connection to an authentication service can be pretty light so I'd imagine most people would be able to hook up once to validate (I'm not talking Diablo III / Windows Live crap where you have to be connected all the time whilst playing... that just plain sucks)
@Minishdriveby - Awesome userID :) I agree but is that a real issue nowadays? Connection to an authentication service can be pretty light so I'd imagine most people would be able to hook up once to validate (I'm not talking Diablo III / Windows Live crap where you have to be connected all the time whilst playing... that just plain sucks)
The biggest flaw in this whole ideology of having a physical disc tethered to an online account in order to play it is that not everyone has access to the internet. If you don't have internet access how will you be able to register your game? It now becomes unplayable.
The biggest flaw in this whole ideology of having a physical disc tethered to an online account in order to play it is that not everyone has access to the internet. If you don't have internet access how will you be able to register your game? It now becomes unplayable.
Conversation powered by Livefyre
