@Busta @FAIL_RETURNETH @CWSoccer07 @OCxVIRUXZ Warranties on new cars are cheaper and cover more than you can ever get on a used car. That is incentive. I went through this two years ago, when my wife and I looked at two SUVs one new, one used. The cost of the warranty on the used car was more, and covered less. Thus incentive.

And yes, I completely get that cars cost much more. And time is completely relative to comparing of the two industries. The crux of the entire used game market issue is a 2 part-er.

1. Gamestop marks all used games 5% less than it's new counterpart, regardless of condition. So they are acknowledging, the condition of the disc is meaningless, because regardless, it's 5% less than it's new product.

2. Volume of used games competing against it's new game counterpart. Ie, COD Black Ops 2 (new) - $60 vs COD Black Ops 2 (used - $55). Few other markets have products compete against itself in a national market.

It's my belief all new games should either off non-transferable content (ie, content you only get if you buy it new) or used games should always be sold at the same price as new. The content of the game does not change unless the game/disc is unplayable, and if the disc is unplayable, it's worth $0 not $5, not $25, etc.

@jd7904 @CWSoccer07 Not in entirety. There were only certain items in the warranty that were transferrable (powertrain). Much of our warranty on our Honda was non-transferrable.

@OCxVIRUXZ The car industry has already counter-acted on second hand sales. (Let's ignore the fact that cars are physically degrading on a scale much faster than a disc can degrade). The car industry has non-transfer-able warranties. When you buy a new car, you cannot sell the warranty (as-is) to the next owner. Thus making incentive to buy a new car. And cars are the worst example of second hand market. They are not sold in the speed of games nor consumed in the same speed. Ie, you don't drive your car for 10 hours and sell it back to the dealership. And nor do you see (on a normal basis) 2014 Camaro (new) sitting next to a 2014 Camaro (used). And if they did, that's where the incentive (mentioned above) that car manufacturers have given on new cars tips the scales and evens the playing field of new/used.

The point of all of that, new/used in terms of digital is meaningless. If the disc is playable, the term "used" is not actual. The simple fact if the disc had been played for 1 hour or 100,000 hours, if it plays, the 1's and 0's are still the same, thus the game is the same. This is not the case in the car industry, used cars are cheaper because their usage is devalued the car.

@Jay2528 Wow so it's even more than I thought. I was going to give people a bone. So in almost 20 years of gaming...they've gone up a whopping $10 (considering that doesn't cover the $30 dollars of inflation). So in reality, we are getting everything $20 cheaper than it should be. Interesting....

@bigmikeOK Agreed. A bit too early on the criticism, but I guess I have an extreme appreciation that these people work their tails off to earn a living. And they (developer groups) operate like contracting groups. They pay their employees for as long as they can with the profits or investments. Every dollar lost is money they can't pay to their employees, or staff they can hire for new investments, or even just new investments. I guess I just don't see the issue in the people that are being robbed of profits trying to get what's rightfully there's because the used game market as it exists today is not healthy for the very groups that provide us the products we desire. It's a lopsided market, it only caters to 2 groups, retailers selling/buying used games, and consumers purchasing them...everyone else is collateral damage.

@Tuckpoint Not a child sir/ma'am. 32 years old, wife, kids, etc. I handle my money just fine, which is why I purchase the things I want, and don't mindless spend money on things I don't want or have the ability to afford. It's why I don't work on cars for a hobby....it's too expensive. If it wasn't, I would do that as my hobby. I buy maybe 5 or 6 games a year. It's all I have time for. And sure enough, it's what I can afford. Now if your addiction requires 15 to 30 games, then my friend, you need to make sure your wants matches your budget. I conclude most people want more than they can afford. And the side effect? They buy used, and the developers (of which they want more games) get less profit. Do people think games are magically created? That it's nothing to sink millions of dollars for years in an investment (development) and hope that it turns a profit, and you won't get bamboozled out of profits.

Unshackled - Yes. Zero restrictions, zero policies. And you completely missed my point about used product markets. There is not one similar market that is comparable to the used video game market. Cars - not the same, not the same load of transactions and speed (how many times does someone buy a car one week, sell it back the next week.....1%?). TVs....seriously, I can't think of one Used TV store center making the volume of transactions and pure profit as Gamestop....The point is, almost all of those things are physical products. They depreciate over time. The game will always remain the same, regardless of the years, decades the pass.

Seriously, you want to know why you are being nickled and dimed for DLC, extra stuff???? Seriously , you know why??? Because of the very used game market you defend. The publishers and developers are seeing less profit because it's siphoned off to used game transactions. So to regain some profit margin, they hit you with DLC. Again, another reason why I think the gamer population is under-informed (go read articles on why they started doing DLCs and extra stuff - many will state it's to counter-act less than expected profits).

@presbeeblebrox Ownership of software is different then most other products based on the consumption speed of it's community. And there are always incentives to buying new. Why do you buy a new 2013 car when a 2012 is $5000 less (with low miles, mint condition)? Because on cars, manufactures have warranties that are non-transferable. Meaning if you buy it new you get a better support model.

Games are a bit different. I've seen guys buy a brand new game and complete it in a week and sell it back. So now there is a $55 dollar used game sitting next to a $60 new game (same game). Which is more appealing? $55 dollar one right? Because the $60 offers no incentive. That's the point...the developers/publishers/console makers have to create some incentive to buy new. Otherwise, the industry will cannibalize itself, where only the high profile games continue to reap profits, and smaller indie games suffer from the lack of their rightful profit.

My opinion - gamers are under-informed to the implications of the used game market and the unshackled environment that exists will not be good for the long-term health of the industry or the ability for new creative IPs to get off the ground.

@Hamsnowmer And why do people mostly buy used? To save money, because they can't find a new copy? Are those people aware the developer sees none of the money, meaning they have less profit to be used for future game development and new IPs.

I disagree with this article. It's also based on assumption of the actual model MS will use. Having a snippet of information does not paint the entire picture of the model. I refuse to pass judgment as Tom as easily done without more information, which will likely be made available over the next month. I've never seen a community turn on the very people that supply them their hobby. If someone thinks the used game market is healthy (in it's current state) for the industry, you are drinking the Gamestop Kool-Aid. Big publishers are making their money back hand-over-fist only for their high profile games (COD, Battlefield, Fifa, etc), but new IPs and new developers have harder times engaging into the market because instead of prospectus buyers purchasing new, they purchase used (since they are unknown to quality/experience). Plenty of articles out there about the topic from people that actual understand the impact used game market is doing to the health of the market and gaming in general.

Either way, I have no problem with this. I buy all my games new. I buy games I want to play. The cost is $60. Dude, in 1995, it was $40. And back then I could buy a car for $15,000 that now costs $25,000 to buy. So, I expect some mark up for new technologies, and the fact it takes longer to build games, and more people to build them. And who said the industry owes you lower priced games because you can't afford them? In fact their are lower priced games, they are called older ones that have been on the market for 6 months and were already marked down to $30. Remember, like we used to do when we were younger. You got $20 and you couldn't buy the new games, so you just bought one new that was marked down to $20 because it was a bit older. I think there are a lot of gamers that expect more than they should.

@mike300zxt, Price drops in games do not take that long. Almost every game I've bought new, it's been on sale. Skyrim, 50% off. Developer and publisher still got their full profits (as that's the retail taking the cut). And I see games within 6 months of release dropping to $50 or $40 if it's really crappy. Regardless of whether you think the game is well-made. Anyone selling it used had zero do with creating your experience. Buying it new at discount price says, hey your game isn't worth $60, but it's at least worth $40. And here's the thing, if you bought it used at $35, what did you prove? Haha developer, I screwed you. Is that your mentality. My point, if you plan to buy it used, buy it new. At least your showing the person that made it, it's worth my time, here's $40, make a better one in the future. As for there's no proof the used game sales is affecting the overall industry, are you reading these articles? For the past 2 years publishers, developers, console makers have been talking about used games. It's not an imaginary issue. The fact of it all, publishers and analysts cannot accurately predict the sale of games, because used game sales are so high. If you'd like to see 1 million copies, but you sell 700 million and 300 million of them are sold back to Gamestop then resold to other people, that's 300 million units you lost from your market analyst. All of that is to say this is what publishers and developers are dealing with.