Game makers strike back at used game market

[luv_mist]

Quote: Originally Posted by Steelersfan85

They could do this except release the digital version like 3-5 days early to encourage people to buy that instead of the physical copy.

The problem is that many of the main sales are hard copy sales from stores like Walmart, Kmart, and the other stores. The moment that these companies transfer to the digital route is the moment that they lose a string arm of their sales. Most people still like the hard copies. If they go to digital, they have more control over the products which mean the price mainly. The price drops will be few and far between. Digital would be beautiful but these people are super greedy.

[KSUowls]

Quote: Originally Posted by Behindshadows

^ This!!! 100% Agree.... Amazing we pay $64.11 or more pure game, not including collector's editions. Trade back in and get around 13 to 22 bucks and they go back and resale for 5 to 8 bucks cheaper than a new copy! And then encourages you to buy a $20 Gamestop card that barely saves you the tax per title you buy. When this process is rinsed and repeated, all the developers are getting cut out of the profits and GS milks it all. Now Blockbuster gamecrazy, movie trading company and Entertainmart are all in on it. At least Entertainmart gives you straight up cash instead of credit.

You may think you are getting "ripped off" on trade-in values (and certainly in a way you are), but if just think about all the used game inventory your local Gamestop sits on and may never move then you might have a better understanding of how their company works.

Yeah you will only get $25 for a new Madden game and they turn around and sell it for $55, but there are hundreds of games in each store that they give out a dollar or two for (though sometimes less), that is just sitting in their inventory for long periods of time. It may seem unfair to the individual who just traded in their $60 game, but I don't think it can be seen as greedy when you consider things like this.

As for the topic of the thread I have mixed emotions. I can certainly understand where the publishers are coming from, but there are a few things that just instantly come to mind.

Price - I honestly don't know the fixed cost of developing a game or how many copies they need to sell to lower the that enough on a per copy basis, but it seems like a price drop back to $50 or even $40 would naturally create a bigger market for your game and also reduce the incentive for people to buy used. A lot I'm sure will still take the cheaper used game, but I would venture a guess that the a $10 cheaper new game would create more utility for the buyer...more so than it does at current prices anyway.

Quality - This is probably a personal bias, but it seems like there has been a lack of quality games being put out lately. Even some of the big sellers like the big football games and the first person shooters seem basically like remakes of older versions of the same game.

Probably just an ignorant opinion, but just my .02

[DXZeke]

Developers are in a bind.

You make the kind of game you want, it's most likely going to cost you 20-30 million dollars to make. Then you have to invest into DLC as well since if you put a game out without DLC it gets beat up in the press now.

Once they make a game they have the used market to contend with. That's terror on a developer. If this was the PS2 era of gaming then they can sustain some of the losses they had on used sales since the costs then were between 1-10 million (AAA titles costing in the 10 mil range).

Thus all these ideas of "online passes" for online play and bonus downloads for buying the full game (Mass Effect 2, etc). They have to do something clever to get the sales back.


Digital Downloads.
PSN and XBLA have done a pretty damn good job of putting games on sale on a regular basis. It's not been crappy games either.

Steam by Valve. That is one heck of a platform for selling PC games. The games you buy at attached to your account so if you need to get a new PC, etc then the games will follow with you. They have sales weekly!!! Those sales have been on pretty much every game they have. It doesn't matter the publisher. To say that the developers would keep their prices jacked won't happen if a game doesn't sell. They will be forced to lower the price for the time being or a permanent cut or else, they won't be sticking around.


Retail Games. I've fallen out of favor with them since there's a lot more download games that are 5-15 bucks that are just as fulfilling and fun be it PC Indie Games, XBox Live Aracade & Indie Games, PSN download games, and even WiiWare games. Those games, at least you feel you get what you paid for. A lot of them now look really good and play really good. I hope that these kind of games make more headway into the market since that's currently where the innovation is.

[FlyingFinn]

Game companies are just trying to gouge the consumer. Make games that people really want to play and are bug free and they won't get traded in.

Also, it is not that a game being bought new and sold used has any affect on their online servers etc... like they try to claim. The original owner no longer owns the game so he can not access the servers. The only people on the servers are those who actually have the game. Which, without piracy, is the same number of copies of the game that sold new.

If online content is a premium, then lower the price of the game and make everyone pay for it. Maybe I don't want to play Madden online, why should I have to pre-pay for a service I won't use just because I bought the game new.

[bkfount]

Quote: Originally Posted by DXZeke

Developers are in a bind. You make the kind of game you want, it's most likely going to cost you 20-30 million dollars to make. Then you have to invest into DLC as well since if you put a game out without DLC it gets beat up in the press now. Once they make a game they have the used market to contend with. That's terror on a developer. If this was the PS2 era of gaming then they can sustain some of the losses they had on used sales since the costs then were between 1-10 million (AAA titles costing in the 10 mil range). Thus all these ideas of "online passes" for online play and bonus downloads for buying the full game (Mass Effect 2, etc). They have to do something clever to get the sales back.

they're only in a bind because their business model is busted. The video game console industry is largely built around making consumers view games as throwaway entertainment, where people are always buying games and looking forward to the next big hit.

The entire industry made the choice to raise development costs and design games catered to a small but active segment of the market. Tons of $60 games are competing for the same consumers, along with overpriced DLC and map packs. The industry created this environment themselves, but instead of fixing the problem, they're fighting it by hitting the consumers up for more money.

[TracerBullet]

Quote: Originally Posted by luv_mist

Main reason why they are struggling now. Look at the type of titles there are on the market. There are mostly shooters coming it seems whether third or first. What happened to the other genres? Give us a twist. The suits are running the business to the ground and will continue to until there is some type of evolution/revolution injected into the model. I like gaming a lot but don't really like being played like a fool financially.

These types of games are pretty risky imo and that's why you see shooter after shooter on the market. If a game doesn't have an already established name, people are skeptical of buying it now a days. Developers see games like Mirror's Edge, Alpha Protocol, and Alan Wake fail and then don't bother to make them. Lately it seems that developers that want to make a different type of game have to be one of the system's exclusives (excluding Alan Wake) to see some sort of monumental success. If you look at the biggest flops of the year, there are no shooters listed.

[spit_bubble]

The industry has essentially painted itself into a corner, and now has to wait for the paint to dry.

While they are waiting, rather than this petty nonsense of attacking the used game market, they need to seriously figure out a way to reduce the cost of producing and publishing a game. Two things instantly come to mind as possible solutions, things which are very likely already underway:

1. Developers and publishers need to get together with the console makers and come up with some sort of generational standard... Meaning that resources won't have to be wasted on getting a title to work across all the platforms. As I understand it this is already happening, to a certain degree. That is to say, console makers fully understand the need for software to sell their console, so it obviously makes sense for them to facilitate the creation of quality titles. For the current generation it seems this aspect was overlooked, or at least not given enough priority.

2. Digital downloads. Yes, a lot of people don't like this, they want the hard copy. But those people just need to get over their psychological short comings. Here's a hint for those people: You don't own anything in the physical world... You will die sooner than you think, and then you will see the only thing you truly own are your deeds done. So the shift that needs to be emphasized by these gaming companies, is that they are not offering you something to own... But rather a service: The service of gaming. The implications of this could translate into any number of things down the road, including a "greener" gaming industry in which even the consoles aren't an object to own... But in the short term digital downloads look like the next logical step for the industry to take.

[Cusefan]

Quote: Originally Posted by pjv31_OS

IMO This will eventually backfire on these companies. Lets face it, we are living in hard times, and to make matters worse most $60 games aren't even worth that. Seems like I am let down by a game more often than I enjoy a game. To me there are only a few titles a year that are worth $60. I will pay it if I feel its worth it, but I rent or buy used with the majority of my games. Now even just renting a game we are being punished. Screw the 7 day trial BS too. I rent games multiple times. Gamestop has even come out and said they will not adjust a games worth based on if the online code has been activated. I just have a feeling that gamers aren't going to stand for these new practices. They will speak with their wallets. And just to speculate a little. When the PS4 and new xbox comes out, i look for games to be at least $70 new.

I do not see how this can negatively affect the Developers of games that use this new tactic. Its not like people are just going to avoid a new game because they use online codes. People who refuse to pay for the code with a used game are only helping gamestop. We keep saying " The developer needs to make a better game!", but how are they supposed to make a better game when some of their profits are being taken away by used games?

Like it or not, this is a new fad that will not go away, it will only get bigger. I guarantee that the next Call of Duty game will feature a online code of some sort, it is a way for developers to recoup losses from Gamestop.

There is good news though, this will give more of a incentive for developers to create DLC like with Mass Effect 2.Personally, I would rather give my money to the people who create the game, not the people who sell a used copy of it.