Mark Rein: "Preowned is Bad"

[bapenguin]

Computer and Video Games (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?page=http://www.computerandvideogames.com/news/news_story.php(que)id=125925") has an interview up with Mark Rein of Epic Games. One of the topics is a recent speech Mark gave at Edinburgh. He discusses why he thinks Pre-Owned titles from companies like EB Games and Gamestop are hurting the industry.
If you walk into EB in the US, they try and sell you a second hand version of a game before a new one. I think that's bad. It would be fine if they share that revenue with us. They can also be marketing partners with us as well. We can have an official refurbished games policy. That's the problem. Those resold games use server resources, tech support. The majority of guys calling up saying "I don't have my serial number", I'm sure a lot of those are resold. It costs us money. Those customers think they paid for it, and they're entitled to support. The reality is, we didn't get paid. They didn't pay us.
So very true, especially since the profit margins are so high for EB on those titles. You'll get a 20 dollar credit for something they will sell for 40 bucks. That's quite the markup. And what does EB offer that say, Walmart or Circuit City doesn't offer to justify such a cost increase of that game? What service do they provide with that preowned title? They don't refurbish it, repackage it, or anything like that. The developer should definitley see some of that profit. I wonder if the game companies start referring tech calls back to EB on preowned titles if EB would change it's mind on the preowned policy.

[Klade]

The developer shouldn't see anything from a resell. They made money when the game was sold the first time. If they don't want to deal with people calling up asking for tech support then they should make sure their tech support is only offered to those that bought the game the first time. Yes its hard to tell the difference but thats the way it is. No reason at all they should make money twice over on the same product. Thats like me selling my used car to a used car dealer and then Ford getting a share of the profits when its sold again.

Sorry shit doesn't work that way.

The solution to this is what Valve has done with steam. Pretty damn hard to resell when your computer game exists only as a license you have a password and user name to access.

[Melonman0]

Although I believe he is right, what can be done about it? I highly doubt EB or gamestop is interested in a partnership, especially for console games where there is almost no tech support needed.

[Babbster]

No, the developer should NOT see any of that money, any more than music companies should get money from the sale of used music CDs.

This is black-letter capitalist law. Once I buy a video game, I own it. I can then choose to sell that video game to anyone I want for any price that myself and the buyer agree on. If I decide to sell that game to EB, Gamestop, etc. the retailer then get that same freedom to sell the used video game for whatever price they can get from their consumers.

If game developers and publishers want to include some sort of online activation that will restrict the ability of used game buyers to play their game, they're welcome to try it [and fail], but as things stand now they get to live by the same rules as anyone else who sells something, and it should bloody well stay that way.

[Kelegacy]

Fuck Mark Rein in the ass with a white-hot brand.

I understand that it hurts the companies, but to get rid of reselling your used games, it would spell the end of used bookstores, record stores and other businesses. I thought it was the right of the End User to do what he wanted with his game/product as long as it stayed within legal guidelines (i.e. pirating/duplicating). I hope this wouldnt also spell disaster for selling your used stuff on Ebay or elsewhere.

I also don't agree with Valve's way of handling HL2 for reselling. You have to pay 10bucks after you buy it off another just to reactivate it? That sounds about as nice as getting a painful reacharound squeeze on a hot summer night.

[frederec]

I don't understand why this argument about used games comes up. Klade made a good point when he mentioned cars. I think the similarity goes further. Many people are more willing to pay full price for a new game knowing that they can sell that game back at a later time. Other people aren't willing to pay full price for games. These two kinds of consumers wouldn't exist if selling used games (or about anything for that matter) was more difficult. Some may buy new games, but I'm willing to bet they'll buy less games altogether than they bought before. Once again running into the problem of only the big games getting sold and the smaller ones getting screwed.

Please don't take this as defending EB or Gamestop's crazy profit margins on their used games. It's one of the reasons I usually would rather get my used games on ebay rather than from a retail store. Though I hear the profit margin on new products is so thin, these stores need to sell used games to stay afloat. That fact I question, but it seems somewhat plausible.

[RMan]

Freaking nonsense. Although he has a point that the developer should not shoulder the tech support for these types of things, boo freaking hoo, it’s a drop in the bucket. As far as lost revenue, sell the games at a reasonable price, or shut the hell up about the completely obvious result of selling your product at a very high price.

[Varsity]

Bad for developers, good for stores because they get all or most of that money instead of a few measly dollars. You can't exactly stop them.

[Orphiuchus]

I have to agree with babbster and klade, saying that reselling products is wrong is just plain ludicrous. If I own the game then I can bloody well resell it. If you want to stop me from reselling it then you have to find a situation where I dont really own the game and I rent or lease it from the developer or producer. Of course, if you try that then I will never even consider paying 50 bucks for the privilage of playing a game that someone else owns. Even if they cut prices I think I would still be inclined to just go play something else.

[mkelehan]

And what does EB offer that say, Walmart or Circuit City doesn't offer to justify such a cost increase of that game?

10% cheaper price on the preowned version, for one. And with coupon codes online (CAG15 and SAVER for EB), you can make it a good deal more. That's what they offer.

[Achilles]

A used car or a re-sold book doesn’t take up the companies server bandwidth or cost them for tech support calls. EB is also making money twice on reselling the games so why shouldn’t the developers? I don’t see a problem with EB and Gamestop sharing the profit, which on used games is pretty high.

[Evil Avatar]

I tend to agree with some of the other posters, once I have purchased a game it is MINE and the developer has ZERO rights to making any profit from a resale of that title.

I also think that most publishers should stop selling titles to EB and Gamestop for exactly the reasons that Mark Rein states above - when you walk in they try to shove a used title down your throat for only $5.00 off the retail price (a rip-off I can't believe consumers fall for) and they gave some poor sap only $20.00 in STORE CREDIT for that title.

That is a massive markup. These companies aren't passing any savings on to the consumer and they are leeching off the publishers at the same time. (You get lured into the store by the TV advertising that the publishers paid for and then EB & Gamestop try to shove their used crap on you or try to fuck you into pre-ordering so that they don't have to do THEIR JOB and stock the store shelves properly.) It is a horrible business model and when those specialty stores go the way of the dinosaur I'll be more than happy to dance on their graves.

Give me a big chain like Best Buy or Fry's Electronics. They have regular sales, they mark down the older titles and they ONLY sell new & sealed products.

[wyndairn]

I don't think he cares about the physical game itself. The problem is the support - multiplayer servers, phone calls, etc. The question is whether or not those services are associated directly with the physical copy of the game, or whether they are purchased solely by the original owner of the game and are non-transferrable with the sale of the actual disc. That's not a black-and-white capitalist law. I haven't looked that closely at current licenses, but it seems that if the companies want to limit this problem, they need to include non-transferrability clause for thse services (which I don't believe exists right now.) Difficult to enforce, but if they don't disclose it now, they probably should.

With the rise of easy online trading, if game companies have to look at supporting their sold games longer and longer (as the existing copies are circulated among the gamers of the world) with no corresponding increase in revenue from new games sold, it's a downward spiral for the industry. World of Wacraft or the like can be supported indefinitely, but tons of people still play Diablo II and other older games. Blizzard still has to support those guys. I sympathize with the problem here.

[Babbster]

The tech support argument is total bullshit. For one, used PC games constitute a tiny percentage of EB and Gamestop sales; for two, PC developers/publishers already have mechanisms in place to limit resale potential of their games; for three, even if they don't want to limit that resale potential, a simple online activation with a person's name and a password could limit the tech support to a person who buys a used game.

I wonder how much tech support Epic and other companies end up unknowingly offering to software pirates. Should EB and Gamestop foot the bill for that, as well?

edit: PS- To Evil: $5 off a videogame which I can't get for less than full price anywhere else IS a good deal, especially when I might buy 8-10 games at a shot. Of course, I've only sold games to EB once and I don't care if they're making giant profit margins on them.

[Evil Avatar]

A used car or a re-sold book doesn’t take up the companies server bandwidth or cost them for tech support calls.

Last time I checked, most Xbox titles don't use up any bandwidth from the company - they use your own bandwidth and you PAY Microsoft $50.00 a year for the right for the Xbox to use your own bandwidth to connect to other players.

And most PC titles offer up dedicated server files to the consumer - again it is the consumer footing the bill for the bandwidth and not the publisher or developer.

About the only people actually taking up bandwidth costs are the MMORPG's and they charge you a monthly fee.

This is a non-issue.

As for customer support calls - if you want to be in the business of selling games then you have to budget in tech support for the life of the product. That is just the way it goes. You can't go complaining about it just because consumers have the right to resell the product.

[RMan]

Yea, but the primary reason the profit margin is there is BECAUSE the developer isn't getting a cut. If the developer's getting the "fair" cut, it wouldn't be any cheaper since the physical product is really not what's being sold.

[Deadend]

Reselling games is legal, it would be nice if they could have the same deal with Blockbuster that the movie studios do however.

Reselling games does hurt devlopers, at least in the style EBGames/Gamestop does it, with massive markup over what they pay and keep the prices barely cheaper than buying a new copy.

Mark mentioned that if games could sell more copies, they could be cheaper, as in... the market penetration of a movie which would allow for lot's of money and a lower price.

[Conner Dain]

ANYONE who thinks that games would actually go down in price if sales were higher needs to take a look at some nice beachfront property I have in Arizona. It's a REAL sweet deal!

[mightbe]

I'll stop buying the used game two months after release for half price when they stop charging $60-50usd for new games.

Raising the price point of new games only drives the preowned market even higher.

If developers/publishers don't want the preowned versions to be on equal footing with a new copy then they need to include more incentives for the original owner. (eg. online registration yeilds exclusive levels/weapons/etc. this way they get extra market data out of the deal)

Honestly I think that this is just more of the game industry whining in the same way that they did 10 years ago about game rentals. Which are still a steal. $7 for 2 weeks of a game? For most titles that's more than I need.

[RMan]

Mark mentioned that if games could sell more copies, they could be cheaper, as in... the market penetration of a movie which would allow for lot's of money and a lower price.
They could be cheaper, but they clearly could be cheaper right now. Sales have gone up dramatically in the last 20 years, and reproduction costs have also dropped dramatically, and none of that has translated into a drop in price, only a rise in development and marketing costs.

[Inspector Fowler]

Why shouldn't the developer have to shoulder these costs? For every legal copy of a game being sold, it was once sold as a brand new game. What he is saying then, is this- "We do not have the tech support resources to actually support the number of games we are selling." If the USED owner is calling in for tech support, then the NEW owner is not.

[GunnyMo]

And what does EB offer that say, Walmart or Circuit City doesn't offer to justify such a cost increase of that game? What service do they provide with that preowned title? They don't refurbish it, repackage it, or anything like that. The developer should definitley see some of that profit.

It's already been well put but why oh why should they see any profit from used games? All due respect, bapenguin, but that is a completely illogical statement. Used cars, books, dvds, clothes, hell anything used owes nothing to its original maker in terms of profit. The publisher made their profit on the new sale. Should the Salvation Army or Goodwill start giving a percentage of their profits back to the original clothing manufacturers?

Whomever said this was pure capitalism is 100% correct. I'm not suprised to see the statement "what does EB offer..." (insert the retail chain you hate most) on this site of retail haters. I can't speak for every single retailer out there but I know at my store we damn well offer better service, more intelligent help and, frankly, we give a damn about our customers. Can you imagine some minimum wage person at one of the bigger chains taking time out of their "busy" schedule to help you in the Electronics Department? Doubtful. And on the GS side you get a seven day return policy and a 90 day warranty on top of that used price. Can you get that with any new game at any big store in the country? Not on your life. One little tear in the shrink wrap and you can't return it at Best Buy, etc.

Consider this: Every big retail chain out there is now testing used games in some way, shape or form. They see that specialty sellers (like EB, GS, etc) are doing it; doing it well and growing their businesses with it.

And just to let you know: it is the publisher/developer who makes the huge profit on new games; not the retailer. On most $50 games retailers only make $3-$9 at maximum. You can't run a business based solely on new games and survive that way.

Keep paying full price for your new, shrink wrapped games with mail in warranties and absolutely no return option once open. :D

Don't get me wrong I fully support developers/publishers getting their just and well earned profits on the sale of their new games. They made the game; they deserve it.

[Claus DuBois]

Maybe this is a stupid question......but (1) who the heck do you know that has ever called tech support for a game and (2) the truly accurate and most efficient tech support, at least for PC games in my experience, is provide by gamers themselves in all the various forums.

[Babbster]

Why shouldn't the developer have to shoulder these costs? For every legal copy of a game being sold, it was once sold as a brand new game. What he is saying then, is this- "We do not have the tech support resources to actually support the number of games we are selling." If the USED owner is calling in for tech support, then the NEW owner is not.

In theory, the claim is that they might have already provided extensive tech support to the first customer. When the purchaser of the used game comes along, they end up providing tech support again but have not generated any new revenue.

Of course, again, this is mainly in reference to PC games (I don't remember ever dealing with tech support for console software) and it doesn't take into account the huge number of customers who don't need any tech support, nor does it acknowledge that PC developers release games all the time that need another month or more of testing/QA.

[RMan]

What he’s really saying is “We’re spending 40-60M per game which means we have to have close to Halo 2 numbers to make a profit, and with rising game costs people are going to buy even more preowned games and it’s starting to look scary.”

[Bone]

You know, as long as they sell the games for less than retail, I don't see why anyone can complain. As a consumer, I have the choice to buy a used disc (which any new game I buy will resemble in a few months anyway) for a few bucks cheaper, or buy the brand new one. Guess what, I almost always buy used when I get the choice.

It's up to any consumer of used goods to "kick the tires", and I know Gamestop will let you examine the disc for defects as well as offering a good return policy. Also, having worked for one briefly, I know that a certain damage threshold exists where the disc will be sent in for refurbishing.

Yes, they buy the used game from you for much less than they will sell it for. If you don't like that, you can keep the game, or throw it away... I'll take a few dollars, thanks. Welcome to America.

[Ernst_Jager]

Unless the game is cheap (as in sub $20 area) no way I would buy a used game. Some people handle their cds like they are strapping it to a tire and driving in gravel. I have a hard time just loaning them out to my friends.

[dr_wily]

"You'll get a 20 dollar credit for something they will sell for 40 bucks."

More like 10$ and then they sell for 45$

I agree with him insofar that it is wrong for those companies to PUSH the client to buy a used game for 5$ less than a new one. But that is where informing the idiots that buy the 45$ used game comes in.

We need to tell them that it hurts developers, buy new, and if they want to buy used get it off craigslist, ebay, or forums.anandtech.com or hardforum.com or something. They'll end up saving money too.

Jesus I have NEVER been tempted to buy used, the used price is always total crap.

I have to admit the new key charge is quite brilliant. I for one have had my key come up on someones half life generator, thereby blocking me from play and having to buy a new copy. 5-10$ for a new activation sounds great to me.

[Steve_Erhardt]

That's the problem. Those resold games use server resources, tech support. The majority of guys calling up saying "I don't have my serial number", I'm sure a lot of those are resold. It costs us money. Those customers think they paid for it, and they're entitled to support. The reality is, we didn't get paid. They didn't pay us.

I just can't agree with this part... Person A sells GAME to Person B. How, exactly, are further resources on the developer/publisher's end being expended here? It's not like Person A is still playing the game (assuming they aren't pirating or somesuch,which of course probably ISN'T the case, but that's a whole different discussion/argument so for the sake of argument let's assume everything is on the up-and-up here). There's still only one person using that particular copy of the game, which, frankly, was already paid for and there isn't any 'above and beyond' unexpected costs here as though a single copy of the game were generating twice the support requirement.

Don't get me wrong I fully support developers/publishers getting their just and well earned profits on the sale of their new games. They made the game; they deserve it.

I can totally see the whole "EB marks it up 100% what they buy it from you for and should share the profit." argument as well. As a business institution, I think EB/Gamestop/Whathaveyou should kick some of that profit they make on a used game sale back to the devs/publisher. That just strikes me as the right thing to do since they do mark a used game up a ridiculous amount from what they paid you for it.

A private sale from me to you, however, strikes me as more along the lines of a garage sale transaction, and so devs/publishers are just out of the loop on that one.

[Achilles]

Last time I checked, most Xbox titles don't use up any bandwidth from the company - they use your own bandwidth and you PAY Microsoft $50.00 a year for the right for the Xbox to use your own bandwidth to connect to other players.That's true, but if it's got downloadable content, or the player starts playing on servers hosted by the publisher than they start to use up bandwidth. But this is Epic talking so he's probably coming from the point of view of PC games.

A company like EB only really makes $5-$10 off a new game, the rest goes to the publisher and the hardware manufacturer, and whatever distributor they're using. Off a used game they make $10-30 in profit depending on what they're taking the game and reselling it for. Tossing a couple bucks of that back to the publisher wouldn't break their bank. It's not like it should raise the price for the consumer, if they did people would just stop buying used games because they'd cost as much as new ones.

Steve's got a good point though that really it's the same as the person who originally bought it continuing to play it. I just don't like EB charging nearly 100% profit and pocketing it all.

[Wadmaasi]

Give me a big chain like Best Buy or Fry's Electronics. They have regular sales, they mark down the older titles and they ONLY sell new & sealed products.
I don't know about Fry's (none around here), but in my experience BB almost never marks down titles, especially PC titles. But, really, for the last several years the vast majority of my PC game purchases have been from GoGamer. I usually wait for something I "need" to go on 48 Hour Madness, then snag 2 other "want" games to go with it to maximize my S&H dollars.

[Heretic Machine]

If I make a grill and sell it to you, and then you sell it to someone else, I should recieve some of that money.

Does that make sence to you? Because it doesn't to me. Fuck the people who try to stand in the way of a free market.

EDIT: Oh, and guess what? If you want to sell your games at a reasonable price, get off your ass and put it on eBay.

[Xerxes]

The practice is fucked up regardless of if you love your ebgames or not. It's legal and justified. I'm probably more pissed at my locals on how they handle shit so like EA says fuck'em, Fry's always have NEW shit for $about 15 off on the first weekend and throughout. EB, Gamecrazy, Gamestop, all of them. The game companies should leave reused gamers hanging. You want to resell, you support it. That's if we going by someone car resell example.

I'm mad at:
-The retarded mark up.
-The shitty quality of used games. I don't won't a game you baby brother chewed on.
- No books, I mean most folks who turn them in figure "ha same price with or without the book fuck the next guy, i'm keeping the book to a game I don't own."
- ALSO, fucking annoying presale bull. Why the fuck am I going to give you $10 for some shit I haven't the foggiest about. I mean these assholes are a pain. Not to mention I can go to any decent real store the SAME day it released and get that first week deal. $5 off here, giftcard there. NOPE I'm, gonna give these assholes $10 for a game they charging $5 more than the other stores "regular" price. They must money off that shit too.

[netcraazzy]

I tend to agree with some of the other posters, once I have purchased a game it is MINE and the developer has ZERO rights to making any profit from a resale of that title.

I also think that most publishers should stop selling titles to EB and Gamestop for exactly the reasons that Mark Rein states above - when you walk in they try to shove a used title down your throat for only $5.00 off the retail price (a rip-off I can't believe consumers fall for) and they gave some poor sap only $20.00 in STORE CREDIT for that title.

That is a massive markup. These companies aren't passing any savings on to the consumer and they are leeching off the publishers at the same time. (You get lured into the store by the TV advertising that the publishers paid for and then EB & Gamestop try to shove their used crap on you or try to fuck you into pre-ordering so that they don't have to do THEIR JOB and stock the store shelves properly.) It is a horrible business model and when those specialty stores go the way of the dinosaur I'll be more than happy to dance on their graves.

Give me a big chain like Best Buy or Fry's Electronics. They have regular sales, they mark down the older titles and they ONLY sell new & sealed products.

While I do agree with you that EB and Gamestop are making a lot of money on used games I still think they are a million times better than going to big box stores like Best Buy to get games. Have you ever tried to buy an older title or maybe a lesser known game from Best Buy? I'd say there's about an 80% chance they won't have it and the sales people will have no clue what you are talking about.

The fact is that big box stores view games as a way to bring people into the store but not a major revenue source so they usually only carry the big name titles and the stuff that has been most recently released. You may not like EB and Gamestops profit motive on the used games but I'd take them over a Best Buy or a Circuit City any day of the week.

[RMan]

But this is Epic talking so he's probably coming from the point of view of PC games.
I don't think so, I think he's using the tech support/server cost from the PC end, but the preowned games are primarily console games (I haven’t even seen EB selling preowned PC games, but I may have missed it). Basically, he's using the parts of each market that play into his argument the best.

[Opty]

The way EB and Gamestop are handling preowned games is helping the industry because when offered the choice of something new for $2 more than the used, you'll always choose the new. Anyone who sells old games to EB/GS are retards because they could get twice as much by selling it on Ebay, and then both parties win: the buyer gets much cheaper than retail and the seller gets more than EB's $5 for a $50 game.

[Bone]

Gamestop doesn't buy back used PC games, specifically because of issues with CD-keys and the fact people can easily rip the game and come back and sell it. So if Mark is talking about used PC games, he's blowing a lot of hot air.

[atariv8]

I have to admit I've thought alot about the used game deal because I've totally given up on buying new games and go only used. I've got two kids dammit! I always wondered how many people wait for used copies also. You got to think that the game developers are taking a hit financially because of this. I wonder if it's going to narrow the game market? I mean people bitch about sequels but those are the only sure bets now I suppose. Then again if it's a kick ass game people will keep it right?

[Achilles]

Gamestop doesn't buy back used PC games, specifically because of issues with CD-keys and the fact people can easily rip the game and come back and sell it. So if Mark is talking about used PC games, he's blowing a lot of hot air.I wonder if now that they've merged (been bought out), EB will stop taking them as well. If that's the case than most of his argument will have left the building.

[NonSoft]

Give me a big chain like Best Buy or Fry's Electronics. They have regular sales, they mark down the older titles and they ONLY sell new & sealed products.


While I agree with the rest of your post, something happened to me a couple of weeks ago that makes me take issue with this. I went to Best Buy to pick up a copy of NHL 2k6 for xbox. When I got there I saw that they didn't have a NHL2k6 , but they did have copies of NHL 06...for $39.99 when it is only supposed to cost $29.99.

So instead of offering an alternative of NHL2k6 for 19.99, they decided to just carry NHL '06 with no competition and jack up the price 10 dollars. Anyway, I wasn't very impressed by that.


Also, as far as used games are concerned they are certainly a mixed bag, but every once in awhile I can't pass up a great deal. When I first bought an xbox one game I really wanted was Jet Set Radio, I couldn't even find a new copy. So I checked the used section and I found a used copy in great condition for 5 bucks. Not a bad deal. :)

[Phades]

I used to work for an independent game store so I'll just make a few observations.

1. Substantially more used games get traded in than get sold. How do you pay for those that don't sell? With the profits from games that do. To make this work and still turn a profit for the store, you need to sell at a good profit margin.

2. If the used price is too low, people are less willing to buy new. As it stands, saving $5-$10 is a nice bonus if it's available used. People would buy that if they could, but if not, buy new and no big deal. If the price for used was $20-$30 cheaper. People would simply ask if you had it used and leave if you didn't. No sale. We tried dropping our used games prices substantially and suddenly we had lots of stock of new games that weren't going anywhere. We had paid for them and since margins on new games suck, this was a bad thing.

3. If you're whining about the condition of a used game, how about looking at it first? Seems simple to me. With that out of the way, if I can save $5-$10 on a game that looks brand new, why wouldn't I? Because I feel the need to rip off the plastic? That's not worth $5-$10 to me.

[Xerxes]

Man everyone in the world needs to find a way to get a Fry's Electronics then...

Seriously, Gamestop is pushing Oddworld's Stranger(whatever it's called) for like $39.99 used still. Fry's has it for $19.99 new. They had the new madden(for people who still gave a fuck), brand freaking new for $38 for the first two weeks. They beat everyones price before you even get there. Common practice on sundays for them is to match all competitors if they haven't already beat them. In most cases they are already beaten. Not just game stuff either.

[TheKeck]

I used to work for an independent game store so I'll just make a few observations.

1. Substantially more used games get traded in than get sold. How do you pay for those that don't sell? With the profits from games that do. To make this work and still turn a profit for the store, you need to sell at a good profit margin.

2. If the used price is too low, people are less willing to buy new. As it stands, saving $5-$10 is a nice bonus if it's available used. People would buy that if they could, but if not, buy new and no big deal. If the price for used was $20-$30 cheaper. People would simply ask if you had it used and leave if you didn't. No sale. We tried dropping our used games prices substantially and suddenly we had lots of stock of new games that weren't going anywhere. We had paid for them and since margins on new games suck, this was a bad thing.

3. If you're whining about the condition of a used game, how about looking at it first? Seems simple to me. With that out of the way, if I can save $5-$10 on a game that looks brand new, why wouldn't I? Because I feel the need to rip off the plastic? That's not worth $5-$10 to me.

Those are some really valid points. I hadn't thought about things that way. Good post.

[Xerxes]

Point number three about crappy product. They keep all the cds in a little drawer. I got my hopes up (back when i use to frequent these stores) for I think KOTOR 2. Case was greasy like, book was managable. Take it up to the front desk and the only copy look like it was raked across the carpet. Then the guy took offense when I told him no thank you. It was the 2 for 1 deal, nothing else look half way wanted, told him to put the other to games up. Not my fault.

[Eran Hawke]

You know, the Nintendo Revolution is going to kick the bottom out of the used NES, SNES, N64 game market. They are wresting control of their games back by offering them for download. Smart Nintendo!

[bstiff]

Unless the game is cheap (as in sub $20 area) no way I would buy a used game. Some people handle their cds like they are strapping it to a tire and driving in gravel. I have a hard time just loaning them out to my friends.


Same here I could see buying used games if they were in the 20-30 range and Id save about $20 bucks. Selling a used game for $5 less then new is ridiculous especially when you know they only paid about $20-25 in trade in.

[Bishop]

Wouldn't the easiest way for a game developer/company to stop such things is to put on all their games in big bold letters, "NOT FOR RESALE". Do you thing that would work?

[51|RandoM]

I tend to agree with some of the other posters, once I have purchased a game it is MINE and the developer has ZERO rights to making any profit from a resale of that title.

Read the software license agreement again. The only thing you 'own' is the media, and a license to use the software under specific conditions.

Preowned is bad for the publishers, no doubt about that, lol. They need to change their licensing agreement to disallow transfer of license without involvement on their part. Do that, don't tell the preowned dealers, wait six months, then sue for damages. :-)

[ÜberJumper]

The biggest problem with resold games is games that require CD keys to play online. It very well could be the original purchaser is using the orginal CD key to play online... they've "sold" the game back to EB or Gamestop, but are still using the product. That's piracy IMO, even if they didn't get the full amount back.

[Bishop]

You guys are complaining about the price of used games at EB where you only save $5, there is a store here where I live called Microplay where you save $15-20 on all used games plus they give a 6 months warranty on all used product.

[benson]

I agree with the people that are pissed off about this comment. I completely agree that if I buy a game (used or new, it is still mine) and resell it, I am not giving a dime to the game company.

On the warranty/support thing - if you buy a used game at Gamestop, you get a guarantee that it will work. The manufacturer will provide the tech support since they made the game. If you buy a used car at a car dealer (say a one year old car for instance) you will get the rest of the manufacturer's warranty. They still have to support the car, why shouldn't a game company support their software?

If anything, this comment makes me want to buy more used games rather than new games. In fact I think I'm done with Epic's new games (like a lot of people are with EA) - not that I buy a lot of their games anyway.

And one more thing. What does a Gamestop offer over a Wal-Mart or Circuit City? They offer a larger selection, opportunity to try before you buy (for used games anyway), and a staff that actually cares about games, and most likely will have played the games you are looking at. They will be able to talk with you intelligently about the games available, and coming out. At Circuit City or Wal-Mart, you usually get a "what do you want?" or "I don't really know" answer to your questions.

Edit: I do have to say that I haven't bought the used games that you only save $5 on. I will buy them if they save $10 or more over the new version, but not to save $5.

[51|RandoM]

Why shouldn't the developer have to shoulder these costs? For every legal copy of a game being sold, it was once sold as a brand new game. What he is saying then, is this- "We do not have the tech support resources to actually support the number of games we are selling." If the USED owner is calling in for tech support, then the NEW owner is not.

How many times would the original owner call in asking for help installing the game? You expect him to have the same problem each time he installs it... and call in each time to deal with that issue?

I don't think the publisher should be on the hook to give the new owners any tech support.

[Bone]

The biggest problem with resold games is games that require CD keys to play online. It very well could be the original purchaser is using the orginal CD key to play online... they've "sold" the game back to EB or Gamestop, but are still using the product. That's piracy IMO, even if they didn't get the full amount back.
Read the above posts or visit one of the stores in question. They don't buy used PC games, and don't sell them used either. It's all console games, so the argument about CD keys does not apply.

[benson]

How many times would the original owner call in asking for help installing the game? You expect him to have the same problem each time he installs it... and call in each time to deal with that issue?

I don't think the publisher should be on the hook to give the new owners any tech support.
If a game has the same problem for every owner, wouldn't that be a sign? If that was the case, I'd have to say that company needs some help in the test department.

[Steve_Erhardt]

-The shitty quality of used games. I don't won't a game you baby brother chewed on.
- No books, I mean most folks who turn them in figure "ha same price with or without the book fuck the next guy, i'm keeping the book to a game I don't own."

Tell 'em you want to see it before you plunk down the cash. That's what I do. If the disk looks like somebody used it to surf down the length of their driveway, I say "no thanks". If it doesn't have a manual with it, I'll make a judgement call... simpler games (fighters, shooters), I don't worry about too much. Other stuff (RPGs, for example) no manual = no sale.

I have to admit I've thought alot about the used game deal because I've totally given up on buying new games and go only used. I've got two kids dammit! I always wondered how many people wait for used copies also. You got to think that the game developers are taking a hit financially because of this.

Buying used has saved me a bundle on console games. Sometimes it can be a pain to wait for them to hit a good price, but my wallet always feels better regardless, though I WILL go out and buy a particularly hot title (Halo 2, Mechassault) that I want badly right off. I still buy my PC games 1st-hand, without exception, though. As for the developer's taking a hit... that may very well be. I can't say if the used market weren't availalable to me that I wouldn't buy the titles at all at the full retail price, but I would skip at least some of them.

[Dr.Finger]

Should Ford get a cut of the Taurus my neighbor is selling?

To me that's what Rein is saying. Do preowned games piss off the developers/publishers/ console makers? Of course, but so what. I have a little sympathy because this comes from a developer and not a publisher but it's still re-gaddam-diculous.

[Dr.Finger]

Read the above posts or visit one of the stores in question. They don't buy used PC games, and don't sell them used either. It's all console games, so the argument about CD keys does not apply.
Actually some EB stores do sell preowned PC games, so the CD key thing does occasionally apply.

[Bone]

Steve brings up an excellent point. I will buy the Halo 2's and other must-have-first-day titles when they come out. Used titles give me a chance to catch up on games that I didn't consider important enough to buy new, but can save money on now.

So, a used title was never a "lost sale" for that developer. They lost the sale when I spent my fifty bucks on better titles instead of a marginally good one. Lower your prices or make your games better, because we all have the ability to vote with our wallets. Blaming other people for your own shortcomings is weak.

[MasterKwan]

To me, the car analogy works really well here. The support Mark's talking about is like a transferable warranty. If you're not the original purchaser, you get no warrenty unless you pay a warranty transfer free (which is basically what Valve does). If you want support, it's basically built into the original cost of the program for the original purchaser or you need to pay a transfer fee.

[Tennistoad]

Hey bozo's wanna end the used game market!!!! Drop your freakin prices to $15 bucks a game and give eb and the other retailers 7 of that. Sure you'll still have the little guy selling em (local game shops) but the big guys will drop used games as they will push the new ones for a nice profit margin. You'll probably see sales go thru the roof on even crappy games because $15 in this market is a total impulse purchase..

Don't think you'll get a return on the investment of your 50million dollar game... Well don't waste 50mil on a game with a user base that can't support it on that margin.. Jump on that nintendo bandwagon and make money by innovation not Following the heard and bitching because the game you made didn't hold someones fancy long enough for them not to trade it in..


/whoops spend 15 trade in for 4 and eb will sell for 10 and still make good dough... Nevermind this insane debate...

//The only way for these developers to live in peace with the resellers is if there is a huge installed base of hardware owners to support both. examples...vcr,dvd,books, etc everyone reads, some new some used some in the library, Everyone seems to have a dvd player,, some new, some used, some in the library, get the point.. These developers can't win untill the hardware is of a huge scale.

[Bone]

Actually some EB stores do sell preowned PC games, so the CD key thing does occasionally apply.
If they do that, then yes, those games are being pirated unless you can prove you have digitally "shredded" the CD-key, which will never happen. Although with Gamestop's recent consumption of EB, this shouldn't be an issue soon since Gamestop refuses PC games at the used counter.

[Sensei-X]

As someone mentioned before, many of the used games never get sold, and frequently end up in the ultra-bargain bin marked down to $5-10 resulting in a loss. GameStop and EB offer return policies if you buy a used game that turns out to be defective. If a game that appears to be fine turns out to be broken, the retailer has no recourse but to trash the game and eat the loss. Extremely old game more often then not simply don't sell, and if you go to an EB, GameStop, etc, and 2 days after the game was released they have used copies of the game then maybe your game wasn't good enough to warrant a new purchase to begin with. We also need to take into account how many new games are sold using the money from selling of used games, how many of these people would buy less games if they couldn't get rid of old ones. We'd surely start seeing a surge in rentals.

[Xerxes]

Should Ford get a cut of the Taurus my neighbor is selling?



But you can't call ford(dealership it originally came from) and whine about something being wrong. Ok you can for money. :o

But get this. Some games need to know numbers on should or shouldn't they make a follow-up. A game, moves a few hundred thousand carts. Over time it moves on to generate way through second hand. Too little to late because it's a intial sales dud. And the publisher/developer aren't getting a damn penny.

[GunnyMo]

Yes, they buy the used game from you for much less than they will sell it for. If you don't like that, you can keep the game, or throw it away... I'll take a few dollars, thanks. Welcome to America.

Amen, broutha! Preach it! :D

[Phades]

As someone mentioned before, many of the used games never get sold, and frequently end up in the ultra-bargain bin marked down to $5-10 resulting in a loss. GameStop and EB offer return policies if you buy a used game that turns out to be defective. If a game that appears to be fine turns out to be broken, the retailer has no recourse but to trash the game and eat the loss. Extremely old game more often then not simply don't sell, and if you go to an EB, GameStop, etc, and 2 days after the game was released they have used copies of the game then maybe your game wasn't good enough to warrant a new purchase to begin with. We also need to take into account how many new games are sold using the money from selling of used games, how many of these people would buy less games if they couldn't get rid of old ones. We'd surely start seeing a surge in rentals.

You nailed it. If I couldn't sell my games on the used market, I'd buy far fewer games. Right now I really don't buy many used games, but I do sell a lot of the ones I've purchased new. If I couldnt'd do that, they'd be getting much less of my money.

Heck, used games may even indirectly make developers money. Jim wouldn't pay full price for Halo but sees it for cheap in the used bin so he picks it up. He loves it and when Halo 2 comes out, buys it immediately. There's a new customer for Bungie and MS they may not have had.

I bet MS and Sony love the used hardware market. Since they lose money on every console, here's money they didn't have to lose and yet a new customer to buy their games.

[Rifter]

I just can't agree with this part... Person A sells GAME to Person B. How, exactly, are further resources on the developer/publisher's end being expended here? It's not like Person A is still playing the game

I think the "issue" here, is the life of a product. Game X has a game life of 2 weeks. Calls come from consumer A during this time. Consumer A finishes game, gets tired of MP, and quits playing game. He sells it to the store. Consumer B buys game X and plays it for 2 more weeks, causing 2 more weeks of support calls and server support from developer.

I believe that is what he was complaining about. I can understand the complaint, but at the same time, I can't really buy into it. If you own an item, you can do what you want with it. That is why I hate EULA on many pieces of software, that try to take away your rights. This really boils down to a fair use argument, that Mr Rein will loose out to.

As for selling games, my local Gamestop and Game Crazy only sell console games, not PC games. Though, EB will buy a VERY few PC games, but gives you literally pennies on the dollar for them.

[bapenguin]

I think everyone is really looking at this the wrong way. I don't think he's saying the developer is entitled to that money, you really have to read the whole article to see the context it's used it. He's talking about industry growth. He's saying that the growth of the industry is being hindered by cost. If they could sell games at DVD prices, they'd be very happy, they'd push a ton more product etc. The problem is, there isn't enough installed base to do that. Pre-own sales is a place where they could bring in more revenue. What he is suggesting is a partnership. Look at it this way.

One suggestion would be to give retailer a higher % of the sale, right now say they get $5 on a 50 dollar game. Say instead the publisher sells them the game for 35 bucks, and they in turn sell it for 45 new.

Now comes preown time, someone trades it in, the store gives them 15 dollar credit. In turn sells the game for 40 dollars. Now they turn around and give 5 dollars back to the publisher and keep the rest. Overall the store makes an extra 5 bucks, but more importantly it brings people into the store with more money in their pockets and the possibility to buy more titles.

[Demo_Boy]

Say I install the game, have some problems, call tech support, then my computer dies and I have to reinstall it again and I have different problems, so I call tech support again. I just cost the company double the tech support. Does that mean I should be paying for two copies of the game? I don't think so.

The serial code thing for most games in itself limits transferrability, why should EB be buying back copies of WOW? The liability is on the store to make sure the code is not already being used, so if the customer gets screwed, then EB should be paying for the new code. Of course they just pop open a box and give the guy the serial and return the old disk scratched defective.

So the dev could match the serial to the cd and when he gets back scratched disks, they invalidate the CD thats on the disk.

Of course thats extra tech and manufacturing costs, but its the only recorse if devs want to stop EB as serial code robbers.

[RMan]

He's talking about industry growth. He's saying that the growth of the industry is being hindered by cost...Pre-own sales is a place where they could bring in more revenue.
The industry is being hindered by cost, but the idea that increased revenue will result in lower cost is exactly opposite of what we have seen. Reproduction costs have gone down, and sales have gone up, and all that happened is they’ve tripled development costs and raised consumer prices, and now you’re going to believe them when they try to say they need to figure out how to make more revenue to LOWER prices (Umm, I need to sell you some real estate). Historically speaking, this can only result in higher consumer prices.

You want to increase revenue, how about actually not spending considerably more per product than the market will allow. You think the industry is hindered by costs, how about not raising them. Geesh, some of you guys will believe ANYTHING.

[Zurik]

And one more thing. What does a Gamestop offer over a Wal-Mart or Circuit City? They offer a larger selection, opportunity to try before you buy (for used games anyway), and a staff that actually cares about games, and most likely will have played the games you are looking at. They will be able to talk with you intelligently about the games available, and coming out. At Circuit City or Wal-Mart, you usually get a "what do you want?" or "I don't really know" answer to your questions.

Um, the EB and Gamestop where I live only hire salesmen types, non-gamers. These guys hardly ever know anything about new games coming out, let alone care about anything but hurrying up with your transaction. Best Buy's not much better, as they only have a couple rows of games, and its like 50 something copies of one new title. Now I read Evil Avatar for all my game research. :)

[StGeorge]

Silly rabbits, you don't "own" anything when you buy music, DVD's or video game. You are merely leasing the right to play the game for the indeterminate period as decided by the game publisher (you really don't read those EULA's you agreed to automatically when opening the box, did you now?) Essentially they can say that you have agreed to anything and that they can change the agreement without notifying you at any time. Great system! Therefore if Mr. Mark Rein says "Preowned games are not legal", he can do so. Want to fight him in court? Go ahead... if you've got $25k laying around for legal costs (cause nothing will get resolved in the first 5 court appearances...)

[KDups]

Keep paying full price for your new, shrink wrapped games with mail in warranties and absolutely no return option once open.

Oh please, you know how many "new" games I've bought from EB that ended up being a USED game that was NEWLY shrinkwrapped? Yeah that pisses me off. I know this is kind of off topic, but I fucking hate EB and Gamestop. I hate their "friendly banter", I hate their misinformation, I hate having to turn down preorders, and I HATE being offered a 2 year replacement warranty on a game I'll probably play for 2 weeks.

I've lived in 4 major cities now and they're all the same, coast to coast. Give me Best Buy anytime, at least I don't expect them to know anything when I walk in. If they do it's a pleasant surprise.

[MasterKwan]

That whole "license versus sale" thing is still wishful thinking on their part. It's not clear to me whether it's been tested yet. I have read of court cases where the judge looks at the situation and decides that it's not a license because there are no recurring costs or relationship with the company. So, it's like a book sale. You can call the sale a license if you want to but, if it looks and smells like a sale then why isn't a sale? Can publishers of books now claim that you don't own a paperback but, just license it temporarilly?

I suspect game publishers don't want this tested in court because, then the courts would have to decide. If I give you money one time for a physical disk and you and I never have anything else to do with each other, can you call that a license to use instead of a sale?

It's not like we have a yearly recurring license fee with support rolled in and an ongoing relationship. Then I think you could call it a license.

If Gamestop/EB buckles under, you know Game Fly won't be far behind. I think there are enough vested interests in both rental and used games to make this an interesting fight. If the license "thing" is valid, they should be able to shutdown used game sales and rentals at will.

[Laughing_Penguin]

For those outraged by the markup on used games, I would like to offer a touch of perspective. I had worked in retail for a number of years. My fiancee still does. I also have many friends who still do (many made during my time in sales). If a high markup on a product offends you, I I highlky recommend you boycott the following products (all fo which have markup as high as, and often higher, than the used games sold at EB/Gamestop/etc):

Comic Books
Toys
Non-Video games (such as RPGs/CCGs, etc)
Vehicles
Furniture
Food
Clothing (this one would REALLY make you mad if you saw the cost vs retail in most stores)

Sure, there are often other costs factored into that price, making the markup necessary, but the same can be said for your local video game store. The person who had worked in the independant game store stated some of these costs quite well. This is one area where you can actually see the cost vs the retail price, but it is not uncommon in the world of retail...

[Evil Avatar]

Silly rabbits, you don't "own" anything when you buy music, DVD's or video game. You are merely leasing the right to play the game for the indeterminate period as decided by the game publisher (you really don't read those EULA's you agreed to automatically when opening the box, did you now?)

I think court cases have already been won where consumers fought the idea that the second you open a product you have automatically "agreed" to the EULA.

I don't know about you, but I didn't agree to jack shit when I purchased my DVD of Groundhog Day or Mercenaries for the Xbox. The publisher can try to sell you on the idea that you have agreed to the EULA, but if they don't have it in writing with my signature on it - I didn't agree to anything.

When it comes to movies, you have to abide by federal laws... so purchasing that DVD doesn't give you the right to broadcast the movie or charge people to watch it - but that isn't the same thing as an EULA suggesting that somehow you don't "own" a copy of the game and are only purchasing the right to play it for some amount of time limited by the publisher or developer.

The EULA means nothing if you didn't agree to it - and clicking some checkbox that says "Yes" doesn't mean you agree.

[Xerxes]

Um, the EB and Gamestop where I live only hire salesmen types, non-gamers. These guys hardly ever know anything about new games coming out, let alone care about anything but hurrying up with your transaction. Best Buy's not much better, as they only have a couple rows of games, and its like 50 something copies of one new title. Now I read Evil Avatar for all my game research. :)

Zurik you haven't lied... Actually Best Buy is just as bad. Almost worked there for geek sqaud, it's not do you know how to fix computers, it's do you know enough to sale new stuff they don't need. That's another thing I don't like. I know, I know more about certain games than them and I listen to there sales pitch to get that presale. It's hilarious they way they try to describe stuff. Not to mention the box look, to make sure they have one fact.

But there are a few, and you can tell that's only cause they played the game all day.

[civx]

I like how no one in this thread has even tried comprehending the OP and instead has been spouting useless shit.

So let me break it down for you, ok?

MARK REIN IS NOT SAYING YOU CAN'T SELL YOUR GAMES

He is talking about stores who buy games for $10 and then resell them for $45.The developers don't see a dime of that, and honestly it's a shame. However, he doesn't give a shit what you do with your game.


I don't mean a guy selling on Ebay, I mean the stores.

And there you have it.

[Everlost_MI]

Oh please, you know how many "new" games I've bought from EB that ended up being a USED game that was NEWLY shrinkwrapped? Yeah that pisses me off. I know this is kind of off topic, but I fucking hate EB and Gamestop. I hate their "friendly banter", I hate their misinformation, I hate having to turn down preorders, and I HATE being offered a 2 year replacement warranty on a game I'll probably play for 2 weeks.

I've lived in 4 major cities now and they're all the same, coast to coast. Give me Best Buy anytime, at least I don't expect them to know anything when I walk in. If they do it's a pleasant surprise.

I know by saying ditto that I am being an unoriginal bastard troll. But you are right, I've had the same fun as you as I'll take a Best Buy, Circuit City or CompUSA anyday.

[Everlost_MI]

Zurik you haven't lied... Actually Best Buy is just as bad. Almost worked there for geek sqaud, it's not do you know how to fix computers, it's do you know enough to sale new stuff they don't need. That's another thing I don't like. I know, I know more about certain games than them and I listen to there sales pitch to get that presale. It's hilarious they way they try to describe stuff. Not to mention the box look, to make sure they have one fact.

But there are a few, and you can tell that's only cause they played the game all day.

Ok, I have to pipe up on this. I worked for the local Best Buy when they first hit town here in 1993. I worked in the Computer department for a few months and moved up to the Tech Bench, waaaay before there was even any idea of the Geek Squad. The company policy back then was try and get the PCs working with software if not ship it down to the tech center in Detroit where it would disappear into that black hole for at LEAST a month and when it came back it MIGHT have the original OS let alone your data on the PC. That is if the PC that came back was even yours. The tech boss was a relic of a guy who came from Highland (anyone remember that store?) who recently went belly up and he allowed me to cannibalize parts of out identical devo (items being shipped back to the manufacturer for credit due to various problems) units to get PCs that were less than six months old back up and running w/o screwing the customer over. Six months was the limit since even back in the 486SX/DX 33-100Mhz and Pentium 60-90Mhz days the turn over for models was that often. So back then it was about knowing how to fix PCs I went back a few years back during the holiday season (yeah I was dumb) to get the killer discount on audio equipment and was told that needed repeatedly offer and try to persuade customers to purchase new equipment and warranties. I told the department manager at the time I wouldn't, so needless to say I didn't get my discount on audio equipment that year.

What was my point? I was just agreeing and rambling on about things most of you could care less about. So please excuse me while I shuffle on.

[RMan]

He is talking about stores who buy games for $10 and then resell them for $45.
I think most people here understand that, it’s the effort to convince people that getting a cut of preowned software sales would actually help reduce consumer costs that offended me. As far as him not talking about EBay, his main complaint is that money is being made from games and the developers aren’t getting the money, aside from retail stores pushing preowned before new games, that’s really not fundamentally different from any used game sale. The only reason they wouldn’t be interested in EBay is that they can’t adequately police it.

[civx]

...it’s the effort to convince people that getting a cut of preowned software sales would actually help reduce consumer costs that offended me.

And why is that?

[Kelegacy]

Gamestop doesn't buy back used PC games, specifically because of issues with CD-keys and the fact people can easily rip the game and come back and sell it. So if Mark is talking about used PC games, he's blowing a lot of hot air.

I know it's not as common, but I could do that with my PS2 or Xbox as well.

[trip1eX]

Well would you rather the money goes to gamestop or to developers?

Anyway if they came up with another business model then they wouldn't have this problem. LIke selling games for $20 upon release would help kill alot of the used game market. And this would get alot more people to buy games because it's more of an impulse buy.

[RMan]

And why is that?
Umm, the lying part. Increased revenue per product has only resulted in increased development costs. If they make more money, all evidence indicates that it will simply go to making their brands stronger, not reducing consumer costs.

[civx]

Umm, the lying part. Increased revenue per product has only resulted in increased development costs. If they make more money, all evidence indicates that it will simply go to making their brands stronger, not reducing consumer costs.

If that's true then games would still be $60-$70 like the SNES days.

[RMan]

Well would you rather the money goes to gamestop or to developers?
If you're asking me I'd rather the developer get all the money, but that wasn't the point.
Anyway if they came up with another business model then they wouldn't have this problem. LIke selling games for $20 upon release would help kill alot of the used game market.
I agree, but I do think that just reducing the cost to $20 isn't good enough, the length of games needs to be much shorter. As long as every game has to be a huge, time-sucking beast no matter what the cost is there are a great many I just won't play. There are tons of games I won't even rent because of the time I have to dedicate to playing them (and I don’t finish most of the ones I rent). Games will not sell adequately in their current state, because unlike movies, the length of the experience guarantees that I would never play as many. Also, because of that length and the respective development time, far less games are released than movies, which is why rental stores have 10 times as many copies of a movie as they will a game.

[MasterKwan]

Civx, perhaps you're missing the basic point. If a sale is a sale, then the new owner can do whatever he wants with the thing he bought. Crap on it, sail it out the window resell it or whatever. The original seller has no further rights to it as long as you're not violating some other law by making dups of it and selling it. It's the same as a car or book purchase.

By Rein saying he wants a cut of resale, he's basically implying he has some rights to the games after the first sale. If it's a sale, he has no such rights so, it's pointless to even suggest he deserves a cut. If it's something else and the courts agree, then he can demand a cut because he still has control over the product.

I think it's a sale and he doesn't deserve a dime from resale or rental. If he supplies a service like Steam, then he can demand a cut from the new owner if they want support or to use the service themselves. Valve has the right model in my mind. Sure you can buy a used version of HL2 but, if you want to install it we demand our cut valve says. Idiots who buy a used copy of HL2 just need to keep that in mind.


As for the profits that EB and Gamestop make on used games, well this is America and the rule is, charge what the market will bear. You people who buy used games for $10 off retail are feeding this model so, it's not going away. Their job is to rip as much money out of you as they can. If I was a stock holder, I'd applaude them for doing it too.

[trip1eX]

The best pt I heard is that people wouldn't buy as many new games if they couldn't trade in their old ones. So really, in effect, some of the money from used game purchases is going to the developer albeit indirectly.

[civx]

Civx, perhaps you're missing the basic point. If a sale is a sale, then the new owner can do whatever he wants with the thing he bought. Crap on it, sail it out the window resell it or whatever. The original seller has no further rights to it as long as you're not violating some other law by making dups of it and selling it. It's the same as a car or book purchase.

By Rein saying he wants a cut of resale, he's basically implying he has some rights to the games after the first sale. If it's a sale, he has no such rights so, it's pointless to even suggest he deserves a cut. If it's something else and the courts agree, then he can demand a cut because he still has control over the product.

I think it's a sale and he doesn't deserve a dime from resale or rental. If he supplies a service like Steam, then he can demand a cut from the new owner if they want support or to use the service themselves. Valve has the right model in my mind. Sure you can buy a used version of HL2 but, if you want to install it we demand our cut valve says. Idiots who buy a used copy of HL2 just need to keep that in mind.


As for the profits that EB and Gamestop make on used games, well this is America and the rule is, charge what the market will bear. You people who buy used games for $10 off retail are feeding this model so, it's not going away. Their job is to rip as much money out of you as they can. If I was a stock holder, I'd applaude them for doing it too.

I really don't know what you're going on about so I'll wait for someone else to reply.

[civx]

The best pt I heard is that people wouldn't buy as many new games if they couldn't trade in their old ones. So really, in effect, some of the money from used game purchases is going to the developer albeit indirectly.

The best part is that you heard it so IT MUST BE TRUE.

[MasterKwan]

Haha, I was replying to your post #77 where you said people didn't understand what Rein was talking about. Things are moving pretty fast I guess. You have what looks like 4 other posts since then.

[civx]

Oh, alright. Let's do this then.

Civx, perhaps you're missing the basic point. If a sale is a sale, then the new owner can do whatever he wants with the thing he bought. Crap on it, sail it out the window resell it or whatever. The original seller has no further rights to it as long as you're not violating some other law by making dups of it and selling it. It's the same as a car or book purchase.

I agree.

By Rein saying he wants a cut of resale, he's basically implying he has some rights to the games after the first sale. If it's a sale, he has no such rights so, it's pointless to even suggest he deserves a cut. If it's something else and the courts agree, then he can demand a cut because he still has control over the product.

You raise an interesting point, but look at something like ebooks. If you buy one for say..$5 on ebay, you cannot sell multiple copies of it without getting a reseller license. I think Rein is trying to say that if they had something like that in place, developers would see more $$$ and everyone can go home happy.

I think it's a sale and he doesn't deserve a dime from resale or rental. If he supplies a service like Steam, then he can demand a cut from the new owner if they want support or to use the service themselves. Valve has the right model in my mind. Sure you can buy a used version of HL2 but, if you want to install it we demand our cut valve says. Idiots who buy a used copy of HL2 just need to keep that in mind.

What makes Steam any different?


As for the profits that EB and Gamestop make on used games, well this is America and the rule is, charge what the market will bear. You people who buy used games for $10 off retail are feeding this model so, it's not going away. Their job is to rip as much money out of you as they can. If I was a stock holder, I'd applaude them for doing it too.

EDIT: Forget the last part

I will admit to buying used games though (curse you coupon codes!)

[RMan]

If that's true then games would still be $60-$70 like the SNES days.
I'm sure if we had one hugely dominant console system still shipping on carts then they'd be considerably higher than that. Compared to those days the technology has made games FAR less expensive per unit, and prices adjusted accordingly with the recent generations. Now they're getting higher even though much more revenue is being made per game. So, I say again, increased revenue has only resulted in increased production costs, and no evidence that it’d be any different. It’s absurd for them to raise the costs, then try to convince me not to buy them in some cheaper way so that they can later, at some unknown time, reduce the price. IMO, they created this problem and MS and Sony are making it worse this next generation by raising costs and game prices, so they can live with the consequences.

[civx]

I'm sure if we had one hugely dominant console system still shipping on carts then they'd be considerably higher than that. Compared to those days the technology has made games FAR less expensive per unit, and prices adjusted accordingly with the recent generations. Now they're getting higher even though much more revenue is being made per game. So, I say again, increased revenue has only resulted in increased production costs, and no evidence that it’d be any different. It’s absurd for them to raise the costs, then try to convince me not to buy them in some cheaper way so that they can later, at some unknown time, reduce the price. IMO, they created this problem and MS and Sony are making it worse this next generation by raising costs and game prices, so they can live with the consequences.

How are they making it worse? Apparently the first party games will remain 49.99.

[RMan]

How are they making it worse? Apparently the first party games will remain 49.99.
As far as I know, EA and the like have stated that they will be raising prices. If you're saying that MS published and Sony published titles will still be 50, then that's something I didn't know, but hardly new for a company to take a hit on a game in order to sell a system they own (heck, I didn't pay anything for Super Mario Bros.), doesn't change the fact that they're rushing this generation then making it about raising production costs (this is primarily MS, don't know what Sony would have done if not for MS's rushed system). Like I said, this is why I will scoff at any bitching they have about the results of the raised prices and production cost.

[bapenguin]

Someone mentioned something about charging what the market will bear. Have you SEEN how many preowned copies are sitting on shelves at 44.99? I still don't understand why they don't drop that another 5 bucks. That would make a huge difference in sales, someone in marketing at EB/Gamestop is very hard headed.

[MasterKwan]

Civix, what's different (valve versus unreal) about it is unlike Rein who WISHES to get a cut of resales. Valve has actually implemented something which gives them a cut, if the purchaser wishes to use the used game.

I'm not saying that Valve selling HL2 is any different than unreal legally, just that Valve has looked at the used/rental market and put a mechanism in place to profit from it. So, "right of first sale" still applies and they don't look like pussies going to the game stores begging for a cut. If you buy a used HL2 you're still legal and Valve has nothing to say about it BUT, if you want to use it as anything other than a drink coaster, you have to pay Valve the transfer fee. I think that's damn clever of them. It removes the whole question of license versus sale.

I don't think an Ebook is any different than a paper one. You pay for it. If you give your copy away and never read it again, then morally I think you're in the clear. Legally, I'm not sure. I base my decisions more on the morality of the situation. I pay full price for games because, I think they deserve some profits. $10 isn't enough for me to sell my soul to Gamestop.

[Jaybo]

He makes no sense. Why is offering support for a sold game costing a company more if it is resold? The owner could keep calling for support if he keeps it, right? Now, the owner will not call for support anymore once he sells it, but the new owner might. How is that costing ANY additional money that wasn't already planned for?

It is still one person getting support for each title sold. It is not costing any additional money.

One way they could make an agreement on is to report every resale to the company to show to investors and use it in advertisements - it would show more sales for the title and a continued interest in it beyond just the initial sale of the title at full price.

[MasterKwan]

Just to make sure I was not speaking out of my ass...

It looks like it takes up to 6-8 weeks to do the HL2 CD-Key transfer. You have to snail mail the actual CD-Key sheet to valve, then they'll mail it back to you. Interesting thing is, they'll never re-activate a cheat banned CD Key which means if you buy a used HL2, you run the risk of never being able to use it.

I'd say they're not as clever as I thought. Seems like they make it too difficult to transfer the key to make a profit on re-sales.

[DaXIthR]

When used games only offer me a $5, $10 or sometimes even $15 discount on the price of the original, I shy away from it. I want to speak with my cash. I want the developer and publisher to know that I'm putting hard-earned green on what they put a lot of work into.

I know getting a the same game used for $35 when the new copy costs $50 is essentially a 30% discount - and that's no small sum. But almost always, I feel it's very important that the people directly responsible for the software get some cash on what I buy.

Of course, there are exceptions - like EA Games. I'd be damned if I buy those shits at full price. And like I give a damn whether EA makes money from me. They are doing fine and treat their developers like shit, so F them.

/rant.

[Babbster]

If Epic wants a cut of used game sales, there's a VERY easy way for them to get it: Invest in the companies buying and reselling used games. Otherwise, it's just asking for free money without taking the risk. EB/Gamestop/<other used games reseller> could buy a thousand used copies of <x> awful Epic game, all bought from some other retailer, for $5 a piece and never sell them - they're out $5,000 while Epic has still gotten their normal share of the sales of those thousand units and took zero risk on the used games.

[Mobeus Chronox]

what does EB offer..." (insert the retail chain you hate most) on this site of retail haters. I can't speak for every single retailer out there but I know at my store we damn well offer better service, more intelligent help and, frankly, we give a damn about our customers. Can you imagine some minimum wage person at one of the bigger chains taking time out of their "busy" schedule to help you in the Electronics Department? Doubtful.

::raises hand:: I work in the photo lab next to electronics, I am very busy most of the time and almost always take time to help a customer with a question about anything in which I am knowledgable. Including but not limited to, Computer components and accesories, video games and video game systems, music cds, DVD's, printers, ink, cordless and corded phones and batteries, surround sound and music systems, as well as cameras, camcorders, film, one time use cameras, digital camera accessories, film printing and developing, digital printing and developing. As do most of my compatriots regardless of what part of the store they work in.

Feel free to rag on retail giants all you want, but not all the employees are know-nothing lazy bums. As a matter of fact before everyone at the local gamestop was fired and replaced I'd recieved worse service and information there than anywhere else I'd ever shopped. That includes best buy.

[Major Dan]

Probably all ready been said but here I go.

1) I have never known anybody to call for console support.
a) Most all used games bought are consoles
2) I don't like the fact that GS or EB games have a huge mark up on used games but at least if you wait long enough they do get cheaper.
3) You can almost always get a game cheaper on E-bay(shortly after launch)
4)Neither the developer nor the publisher should get any money from a used sale.
5) Videogames don't make people violant, damnit!
6) I want to see some AO games, Damnit!!
7) Real physics rock, as it helps anatomy bounce in a realistic fashion! DAMNIT!
8) If PC games worked as well as console games they wouldn't need to spend near the amount on Tech support they do. (I am not lost on how consoles are slowly slipping into the bug realm, but overall it happens very infrequently)
9) Bandwitdth, only bandwith wasted is downloading the latest patches, video drivers, sound card driver, motherboard update, Direct X update, and OS hotfix needed to play the game. (I love CP gaming, sometimes it can be a real hassle though)
10) I want more bouncy anatomy--DAMNIT DAMNIT! :rolleyes:

Goodnight all!

[Deadend]

Someone mentioned it wayyy earlier, make an agreement with the company.

Get a game cartel going... threaten EB/GameStop that if they do not get a cut of a resale on a game that they will not get new copies of any game. This would take a large cartel.

The thing about the large company doing resale is that they can sell the same game over multiple times.

Rman, you bitch about how games are spiraling more expesnive and they should innovate to sell more... guess what?!!!

INNOVATION DOES NOT FUCKING SELL!!! THAT IS WHY EA dominates.

You don't want expensive games? Games are expensive because they are made by people who demand to be paid ~40k+ a year, god, how inconsiderate of people to want a income. Oh, maybe they should use less people... but then everyone will just bitch about graphics.

Tell me, would you be happy with games that look like Katamari Damacy because 4 artists had to create an entire city in less than a year? No?

Games will not sell enough copies at $20 to make a profit... because there are not enough game consoles out there for a $50 mil game to make a profit at $20 a copy.

[Wonka]

Well said Deadend.

There is no disputing that EB Games and Gamestop are saprophytic for the industry. They are parastic companies. Middlemen who contribute almost nothing. There are other companies out there where you can buy your stuff from. As far as I am concerned, EB Games and Gamestop could both die out and the world would probably be a better place. At least untill someone else started to do the same thing.

It's true, you do have the right to resell your old games. You do not have to give the publishers a cut. And for consumers this seems quite reasonable. But when you run a national chain of stores that make almost ALL of their profit from this circumstance, that seems a little different to me. This is much worse than a used car salesman. At least a used car is not being routinely sold for approximately 10% less than a new car goes for. If used cars DID usually sell for so close to that amount, then used car lots probably WOULD become illegal. Otherwise, automotive manufacturers would have gone out of business LONG ago, and the only product in the market would almost all be used.

Personally, I always try to buy my used games from Gamefly. The games they sell ARE indeed used, but at least the copy I am getting was bought directly from the publishers and not from some kid for $10. So I buy no games that I have not verified for myself that I like, I feel no guilt, and the games are in remarkable condition. Oh, and even with the monthly fee they still usually manage to cost less. Go figure...

[Rirath]

Feel free to rag on retail giants all you want, but not all the employees are know-nothing lazy bums. As a matter of fact before everyone at the local gamestop was fired and replaced I'd recieved worse service and information there than anywhere else I'd ever shopped. That includes best buy.

I've worked retail before, in electronics, and went out of my way to provide customer service... but it's largely an exception rather than the norm. Does the fact that you and your coworkers have to cover for the electronics guys say anything to you, or the fact you need to know so much about another department?

All retail and specialty stores, if they expect anything at all, expect sells of high profit stuff like guides, subscriptions, used games, warranties, ink, paper, cables, etc. Service comes far behind. Anything extra is typically up to the employee to manage, and how strict the managers are.

[MrMeatshake]

waa! waa! mommy! i don't want to spend any money on support! waa!

the only thing that annoys me is the markup on these resales. why do they try and sell preowned for 10% off the retail price!? it just means that they end up with crap-loads of them sitting around the stores. sell them for a reasonable 60% (and buy for more like 40%) and they wouldn't have to keep loads of stock in.

[Lactose]

The #1 thing you have to realize about buying a copy used: The people that made the game aren't getting paid for that sale. This is similar to how companies in Europe will copy software and sell it in a way that appears to be a legit copy. The money goes to the people selling the product rather than the people that made the product.

Every used copy that EB sells for $5 off the retail price (and yes, people do buy them or they wouldn't do it in the first place) is one less sale for the guys that actually built the fun and more free, unearned money for the people that moved the "used" section to the front of the store.

It's a disgusting, parasitical practice and it makes it just that much harder for game companies to survive.

On a related note, tech support actually does incur costs, believe it or not. We here on this forum are advanced users that may not need typical tech support, but we're the exception. Each tech support call cuts into a game's profits, so you magnify that by polluting the pool with poorly repackaged games and it just costs the developer that much more on TOP of the game that just got sold at no benefit to the developer.

Fact: The best way to put pressure on a game developer if they change something you don't like is to call tech support. Forget forums. Forget petitions. Call tech support and tell them that your favorite power no longer works properly (like after a patch). Get 1000 of those calls going and it'll get the publisher's attention. Go post on a forum and who gives a damn?

You guys significantly underestimate the harm used games have and the cost of tech support. Just think about it. Somebody walks into a store intent on buying a game for $50, thats $50 more for the game industry to grow on (before the store gets its split), and instead they spend $45 and the game industry benefits zilch and the store, through no creative or developmental energy of its own, much like a leach in Will Weaton's underwear, benefits emmensly. How can you stand up for that?

[steve]

I think court cases have already been won where consumers fought the idea that the second you open a product you have automatically "agreed" to the EULA.

Correct. I can only speak regarding German law, but here for an EULA to be legally binding it actually needs to be readable before you use the product, i.e. before installation. German law does not expect a customer to buy a product and then belatedly have to accept an EULA he wasn't able to read before purchase.

Therefore, legally speaking, EULAs that get displayed during installation process etc are not binding here.

However no customer has yet went to court regarding this, but it could get interesting once someone goes that way. Publisher might be in for a surprise.

[Eon]

I believe that retail makes far more profit per box than the Developer does. FAR more profit.

Developers are generally at work for years on a single game, whilst retail buys it in from the publisher, sits on it a few weeks and returns it if it doesn't sell. I'm certain the answer to a lot of our woes in the industry is to go digital and take out the retail middleman.

[Babbster]

I believe that retail makes far more profit per box than the Developer does. FAR more profit.

Developers are generally at work for years on a single game, whilst retail buys it in from the publisher, sits on it a few weeks and returns it if it doesn't sell. I'm certain the answer to a lot of our woes in the industry is to go digital and take out the retail middleman.

The clearest evidence of the thin retail profit margins on console videogames is that only the highest-volume retailers can offer discounts, and even then they can only afford to do so on the blockbusters like GTA. If the margins were higher, then places like EB would do things like offer discounts on preorders of big games. As it stands, though, it's next to impossible to find any prices below MSRP on videogames unless a store is trying to clear old inventory.

The reason for one of the biggest digital deliveries - Valve's Steam - wasn't to cut retailers out of the chain. It was to cut publishers out of the chain. The publisher is the "middleman" who takes the biggest cut for the least effort, and the least risk when it comes to guaranteed sellers like Half-Life.

[Eon]

The situation must be somewhat different in Portland Oregon. In Europe you can usually find games for as much as 10 Euro / 5 pounds below MSSRP on the day of release. Over the next couple of weeks expect heavy discounting.

[RMan]

INNOVATION DOES NOT FUCKING SELL!!! THAT IS WHY EA dominates.
Umm, no, EA dominates because they've been around forever, which is pretty much how most large companies in an industry dominate. And if innovation is so unimportant, perhaps you can explain to me why EA's most successful non-sports title is The Sims.
Games are expensive because they are made by people who demand to be paid ~40k+ a year, god, how inconsiderate of people to want a income.
Umm, I’m not sure what kind of point you’re trying to make, but are you saying that I shouldn’t complain if Wal-Mart hires five times as many employees then jacks up their prices? I wouldn’t care that my shopping experience is slightly better, I was shopping there already and had no complaints.
Oh, maybe they should use less people... but then everyone will just bitch about graphics.
You know, I want to see this mysterious group of gamers that was not buying Xbox games because they didn’t look good enough. Anyone who says this is a smart move for the industry as a whole absolutely has to show some indication, any indication, that people were passing up games based on graphics, then maybe you can convince me (or any person that has put more than 6 brain cells into thinking about it). Heck, I don’t even know any gamers that were bitching about the graphics being sub par at all, much less not buying games because of it. This is about MS wanting a bigger share of the market this time around and having no better idea of how to get it, anyone who doesn't see that as the primary motivation is simply not looking.
Tell me, would you be happy with games that look like Katamari Damacy because 4 artists had to create an entire city in less than a year? No?
Uhh, Yea, but luckily I don’t have to make that choice. Katamari is not representative of current generation graphics, this is just as useless a point as me picking the worst looking 360 title and calling it the best we can expect from the next generation.
Games will not sell enough copies at $20 to make a profit... because there are not enough game consoles out there for a $50 mil game to make a profit at $20 a copy.
Umm, yea, this is part of my complaint.

[Heretic Machine]

This is about MS wanting a bigger share of the market this time around and having no better idea of how to get it

Umm... maybe I missed something in this post... WTF does Microsoft have to do with this? Epic is not connected to Microsoft.

[Tikki]

:rolleyes: /emote Tikki lays out a nice spread of crackers and cheese to go with that whiiiiiine.

Mark...lick my cliboner you fucking money grubbing whore and grow the fuck up.

With this mind set a real estate broker can collect a huge commission from me when I buy my home off the market...I own it now...then I sell it to Joe Schmuckatelly as a FISBO <For Sale by Owner> and the broker keeps getting an endless residual when Schmuckatelly sells to Peter Asswipe for sitting on his fatcat ass and doing nothing in the first place? ...uh NOT!!!!

Gaming companies charge enough in the first place. Someone beats your pos game and does the smart thing and resells it to recover some hard earned money to give to you fuckwads for more games.
Stop paying your techs so much money then, for sitting on their asses all day and us interrupting their gameplay to look up an access code, how hard is that or live with it Skippy.
You could get another vocation. Here's a suggestion for a new vocation. Sign up with the Democrats and whine to them. They'll help spread your rhetoric and do the whining for you. Ask Soros how to do that. I'm sure he'll be happy to have another Koolaide sheep in his flock. MORON :mad:

Game techs don't flame me. I was only trying to make a point to dipshit but if you must bring it on. :cool:

"Aging is inevitable but maturing is purely an option" :D

[RMan]

Umm... maybe I missed something in this post... WTF does Microsoft have to do with this? Epic is not connected to Microsoft.
MS is the publisher for GoW, Epic is most assuredly connected to Microsoft. However, the push for greater market penetration through sheer development money is definitely spearheaded by MS, which is what I was talking about (kind of spun off the original topic a bit). Although I do think Epic is one of the developers contributing to the problem, they’re really just falling in line with the direction MS, and to a lesser degree, Sony are taking the industry. IOW, my complaint was not indicative of some kind of MS/Epic conspiracy, but rather a comment on who’s doing it and why games are being pushed into a high production cost realm. That spawned from why I have no sympathy for the industry as a whole raising it’s development costs then bitching about not being able to make enough returns on their products.

[Bone]

And just like that, by dragging Republicans and Democrats into a conversation about used video game sales, Tikki has ended the conversation! Congratulations.

[Tikki]

Hey I'm one day older than dirt. Gimme a break. Any other flame wars needing stopped just give me a yell :D I'll be more than happy to oblige you kiddies :)
More than half of these clowns don't even know what I was talking about anyway :p
They'll be back tho after the lil yellow buses drop them off :cool:

/e dawns her fire retardant Victoria Secret thong

[Eon]

Thanks for reminding me why I got the fuck out of Tech Support.

How hard is this to understand?

When someone comes in and plonks cash down on a preowned game for a measly 5 dollar savings on that game, they don't pay the developer a penny. At 10 or 20 bucks you can argue that they wouldn't have bought the game anyway, but at 5 dollars off, they're merely opting to buy the game + PC Gamer rather than the game on its own.

In one of these scenarios the developer makes 10 bucks. In the other one the developer doesn't. The retail chain, on the other hand, makes out like a bandit.

Now, can you understand why the guy feels a little like retail is taking the piss?

[Tikki]

And beside all that they better start paying fucking attention to politics now, b/c Hitlery Clinton and Flopsey Mopsey whatever the fuck her name is GORE, etal (latin:and others), are trying to interfer in our private gaming time and this is a good time for them to learn about who's controlling us!! :mad:

[Tikki]

Well here's an idea for you. Open your OWN retail store and sit back and reap the rewards or invest in these companies. Was that to hard to figure out <smackshead> WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!

[Eon]

Do you want me to design 'em, which I'm not that bad at, or sell the damn things - which I have no experience of?

Think there are monopolies now? Wait until the Microsoft Store launches! ;)

[Tikki]

This is a free America and you can do what the hell you wanna do, pal. Go dig ditches or play checkers or stay there in your chair with one thumb up your ass and the other in your mouth, for all I care. I'm just saying there ARE other options. Jeezus the ball is in your court dude. Go make a basket. (shrug) :(

Did I miss the headlines where it said "New Discovery MS Has Monopoly". Old news.

[Straydog3d]

I think a lot of people are missing the guy's point, he said he was not talking about the guy selling his game on ebay, but the retail chain pushing you to buy the game used from the retail chain at a reduced price as opposed to buying a brand new copy which the developer would see money from, in essence they convince a customer to not buy the product from the developer but from the retail chain instead.

[Eon]

Well, then, as I don't want to go out, move to America, get my masters in Business, get a huge loan and start a shop in order to maybe earn more than I do now, I guess I'll continue doing what you do - posting my opinion on bulletin boards.

[Tikki]

I think a lot of people are missing the guy's point, he said he was not talking about the guy selling his game on ebay, but the retail chain pushing you to buy the game used from the retail chain at a reduced price as opposed to buying a brand new copy which the developer would see money from, in essence they convince a customer to not buy the product from the developer but from the retail chain instead.


Well don't fucking buy it. Buy it new!!! I wouldn't buy a used game that has drinks, drool and someone else snot or any other creepy thing on it. Or the cd is scratched and skips or errors out. Caveat Emptor (Buyer Beware) Think for yourself and do what YOU want. Being controlled by some clown in a store is frightening to me for you. If you are that gullible then I have some nice swampland in the middle of Timbucktwo I'll "convince" you to buy. I'm assuming you have a brain. :confused: Use it. :D
Sorry class is over for now. I have other very important duties to take care of but I will be back. And yes...that is a promise and a threat :p

[jim_rock]

You guys may not get this, but after overhead and stuff ebgames almost loses money on every new $50 title sold. Preowned games are the only place they have to make money. I was asst manager at a mall eb and we didnt go into the black untill november and it was all preowned profits. maybe epic could drop their bullshit wholesalenew game cost of $45 a new game and eb would talk.

[Hijinx]

I can totally see the whole "EB marks it up 100% what they buy it from you for and should share the profit." argument as well. As a business institution, I think EB/Gamestop/Whathaveyou should kick some of that profit they make on a used game sale back to the devs/publisher. That just strikes me as the right thing to do since they do mark a used game up a ridiculous amount from what they paid you for it.

A private sale from me to you, however, strikes me as more along the lines of a garage sale transaction, and so devs/publishers are just out of the loop on that one.

So lets open the discussion for all pawn shops. So they need to compensate all Gun makers, Lawn equipment makers,TV's, game developers, guitar/amp makers, DVDs....well just about anything someone can sell to feed their meth habit.

This is complete tripe. M. Rein has upset the balance. It is time to silence him.

I'm sorry, but I see this so often on EvAv.....Do ya'll think anyone should make a profit? Is breaking even all that happens in your lives? Isn't that the dream? My crazy talk meter is about full. Time to go out and make less and less each day, so I can be happy.

[Tikki]

That was exactly my point Hijinx, albeit I did get a bit carried away ;)

[Eon]

There's a subtle difference between making a Profit and making a Profit at the expense of someone else. In its lovely sparkly text book state, Capitalism says that you and I trade and both of us are better off as a result, because the trade should CREATE wealth.

Now if we're looking at a value chain where the guy that makes the product is making a pittance and the guy who sells the product is making a loss, then don't you think it's about time to cut the distributor out of the picture? Because when I look at the figures for this industry it's clear that SOMEONE is making a killing.

[Zofond]

Normally I would totally agree with creator's rights...however in video games, preowned sold games constitute approximately 40% of business for these companies (EB, GameStop, ect...). That being the case, they offer introduciton into the gaming market for a much smaller price, which allows a greater number of people access to the market. Beyond sheer market access, they account for the "hardcore gamer's" addiction and constant return to the store. Really, think about it...how many of you would buy three games a month without the ability to trade in titles like "Destroy All Humans!" which constitute very little replay value, and ultimately a bigger gamble than standby titles you know you love...A huge number of gamers only buy these "risky" titles because they know they can trade it for at least 25 dollars next week if they hate it.

Ultimately, the trade process allows a HUGE number of people access to an expensive business. Video Games became a multi-billion dollar business due to innovations in the ability to open the market; one of those innovations is the trade cycle...it ultimately makes games cheaper for the consumer, and therefore grants a massive audience that otherwise could only purchas a much smaller percentage of product...The other side to the arguement is the ability for specialty retail to exist. Comics and other entertainment segments perpetuate themselves by having "experts" in the retail branch. Walmart doesnt know or care about games...in addition they only carry "select" titles. Due to the existance of these specialty stores, customers get a more tuned approach to product from people that know it. (aside from the occasional schmuck behind the counter...) Stores like EB and GameStop also allow games like Ikaruga to exist and garner ANY profit. Now, that being said, specialty video game stores CANNOT support themselves without the profit they garner from used sales. New profit margin= 10%, preowned = 25-50%. Many times Gamestop and EB actually cut new game profit by approx 33% getting a title first day, just as a customer service.

So, before Epic shoots it mouth off about the time they invest helping "fans without serial numbers" they should consider that the game in that persons hand may constitute a next round new sale. Beyond that, only approx. 1% of gamers actually use customer service of the manufacturer or even consider registering console games. Just ask your co-gamers, they'll confirm that statement. Without specialty stores, the hobby we all love would be regulated to Walmart and Best Buy. Without preowned sales, these specialty stores couldn't pay thier rent, and ultimately the game business would lose market. So, take one for the team epic, and politely inform customers that serial codes are required if need be, but don't blame the people that grant you your audience.

[MasterKwan]

Being that this is America, nothing guarantee's profits from trading. You, as the participant in the trade have to ensure your own profits by charging enough for the product. Look at car dealers, new cars sales has become a volume business because the profits on new cars have declined constantly over the past few years. Car dealers make money on service and used car sales (sound familier?) these days.

The used game business is the ONLY reason the game stores even exist these days. I don't have to finger a game in order to buy it so, I can be just as happy buying a game a walmart or over the internet as buying from a specialty store. They are WILLING to make next to no or any profit on a new game sale (like the car dealer) as long as they can pay the rent with used game sales. Is it any wonder they push used game sales?

Now, if you're not making enough profit on your work, it's time to change jobs or re-negotiate the terms. People like Valve see the writing on the wall. They're going to bypass the current regime all together and go for pure profit. $30 per game instead of the current $5. Mark Rein needs to get with the program.

[MasterKwan]

Wow parallel posting of the same basic idea.

[MrMeatshake]

:rolleyes: /emote Tikki lays out a nice spread of crackers and cheese to go with that whiiiiiine.

Mark...lick my cliboner you fucking money grubbing whore and grow the fuck up.

Game techs don't flame me. I was only trying to make a point to dipshit but if you must bring it on. :cool:

"Aging is inevitable but maturing is purely an option" :D

welcome to evil avatar, Tikki. i'm sure you'll fit right the fuck in.

jesus. :o

[Raizer]

They could be cheaper, but they clearly could be cheaper right now. Sales have gone up dramatically in the last 20 years, and reproduction costs have also dropped dramatically, and none of that has translated into a drop in price, only a rise in development and marketing costs.

Reproduction costs have decreased yes, but production costs on the other hand have increased exponentially. It costs millions to produce an AAA title, and that will only be dwarfed by the 10s of millions it will cost to produce next generation AAA titles. One of the issues the game industry is currently facing is actually how to keep the cost per copy from going higher to meet the increasing production costs. Even if it cost nothing at all to reproduce the actual media or packaging and noone made a profit including the retailer, it would still take 100,000 copies at $50 each to recoup a $5 million development budget. How many more will it take for next generation titles that soar to $10 million, $20 million, etc. Some rare titles do become million-copy sellers and generate a lot of profit. But there are far more that flop at release, or worse get canned halfway through development and never even see store shelves. When everything is added up, it has to come out to a positive number for publishers to be successful, so the top titles have to pay for the weak ones.

[RMan]

One of the issues the game industry is currently facing is actually how to keep the cost per copy from going higher to meet the increasing production costs.
While this is true, increased production costs are something the industry controls, so I'm frankly not concerned with their bitching about the obvious repercussions of their actions. If the industry doesn't generate enough sales to justify an increase in development costs, and an increase in development costs won't produce an equivalent level of profit, then the clear business strategy is not to increase development costs. The increase in costs is being done by the biggest developers in the industry because it’s an effective way to push competition from the market, and by the 360 and PS3 having no clear way to push their consoles besides impressive graphics. If you think God has forced games to cost more to produce, or that the natural evolution of game development has required it, then you are VERY, VERY wrong.

If book publishers decided to raise the production costs on paperback books to a point where they’d have to charge $20, then you’d see a lot of bookstores pushing used book programs over new books, and readers would buy used books. The book publishing industry, however, it not that stupid.

[Eon]

Actually be grateful for the "cancelled halfway through" titles. Given that marketing spend normally equals development spend , if the product is shaky it makes perfect sense NOT to release it!

[dr_wily]

talk about resurrecting a post from the grave, i just got an email notification on this one.

LET IT DIE! :P

thanks alot Raizer, 1 poster

[Eran Hawke]

I have to say, I've really enjoyed this thread, even after being revived from the dead. Some of the discussions have been first-class and thoughtful.

Perhaps we should revisit older topics more often to discuss them in greater detail once the fanboys pass on.

[MasterKwan]

Yeah, I liked this discussion too.

RMan, from my perspective, paperbacks have already been priced out of my life. At $2 each (or the $1.25 I used to spend) I would buy 5-10 books a week. Now, I might buy 1 a month. I can't justify $8 US for a 1-2 day read. I used to download books but, that's kind of a hassle, now I just read other things.

Used to be $1.25 got you a 150 page book with fairly dense fonts and minimal whitespace on the pages. Today an $8 book with the same number of words is 400 pages with large fonts and amazing amounts of whitespace.

[RMan]

RMan, from my perspective, paperbacks have already been priced out of my life.
Interesting, I stopped reading books years ago, for reasons unrelated to price, I didn't know they cost $8 now. You're right, that's already a bit crazy, but at the same time, people are paying $4 for a cup of coffee, so it's all relative :).

[MasterKwan]

When you put it that way, maybe I need to re-consider. I spend $8-10 a day at 7-11. If I get 10 good hours out of a paperback maybe it's worth the money. I think nothing of $50 for 10 hours of good gameplay...

[Raizer]

While this is true, increased production costs are something the industry controls, so I'm frankly not concerned with their bitching about the obvious repercussions of their actions. If the industry doesn't generate enough sales to justify an increase in development costs, and an increase in development costs won't produce an equivalent level of profit, then the clear business strategy is not to increase development costs. The increase in costs is being done by the biggest developers in the industry because it’s an effective way to push competition from the market, and by the 360 and PS3 having no clear way to push their consoles besides impressive graphics. If you think God has forced games to cost more to produce, or that the natural evolution of game development has required it, then you are VERY, VERY wrong.

If book publishers decided to raise the production costs on paperback books to a point where they’d have to charge $20, then you’d see a lot of bookstores pushing used book programs over new books, and readers would buy used books. The book publishing industry, however, it not that stupid.

Then I have to ask you as a gamer, if you were given the option between purchasing a $30 game with less tech (inferior graphics) and less content, and a $60 version of the same game with better graphics and more content, which one would you choose? Developers feel obligated to take advantage of the hardware they're presented with to the maximum of its potential, and to put as much content onto the disk as it takes to fill it up. The idea behind that being that if you don't do it, someone else will, and people will buy their game instead of yours. I will admit that even though graphics and content don't make gameplay, if I saw the game in both forms, I'd be more likely to buy the $60 version because it looks good and has so much content over the $30 version.

[RMan]

Then I have to ask you as a gamer, if you were given the option between purchasing a $30 game with less tech (inferior graphics) and less content, and a $60 version of the same game with better graphics and more content, which one would you choose?
Obviously that depends on how much more content, but developers aren’t raising the amount of content, only the development costs/quality. Disregarding new content though, I’d definitely take the cheaper one since after the first few minutes of playing the impact of the higher quality visuals is pretty much gone.
Developers feel obligated to take advantage of the hardware they're presented with to the maximum of its potential, and to put as much content onto the disk as it takes to fill it up.
Well, then these developers have forgotten what their job is. They’re working for the gamer, not MS or Sony, and are not obligated to make tech demos for their hardware (unless of course they’re developing for them, in which case they are making a tech demo/marketing tool primarily). Smart developers know to spend their resources in the areas that will generate the best payoff for the gamer’s experience, WoW, for instance, is not technically impressive but people really don’t care, it’s a great all around product. If they made the same game, but with next-gen demo quality artwork then jacked the price and tried to convince people that it’s SOO much better a game because of it I’m sure they’d have lost many customers.
The idea behind that being that if you don't do it, someone else will, and people will buy their game instead of yours.
And if all that mattered to gamers is how much money was put into the game’s graphics then that’d be a useful point.
I will admit that even though graphics and content don't make gameplay, if I saw the game in both forms, I'd be more likely to buy the $60 version because it looks good and has so much content over the $30 version.
Hey, if it’s worth it to you, then cool. However, the point was that developers are bitching about high development costs, and they’re the ones raising them. In the end, a more expensive game will likely be better, but does that mean that we should just jack the game development costs up to $200M, make 5 games a year, and sell them for $100 each? In the end, there’s no significant portion of the public that felt that current generation game graphics were lacking, there’s clearly no “need” for it other than big developers and publishers wanting to strengthen their properties by limiting competition. And like I said, the bitching about high development costs from the people jacking up those costs will get absolutely no sympathy from me, or anyone else that makes an effort to understand what’s going on.

[Raizer]

Well, there are plenty of indie games produced on small budgets. A lot of them are actually a lot of fun too. But they don't have flashy graphics, loads of content, or a big marketing budget behind them. And most people don't even know they exist. I guess it's unfortunate in a sense, but the reason the development costs continue to rise and the graphics keep getting better is because that's what sells.

WoW is a really bad example if you're looking for a low-budget success story. WoW had a gigantic budget over its development cycle, a huge team, and an immense amount of content. And that's the reason that people play it: because it is better than everything else on the market. Most videogame buyers have been proven to buy top notch games regardless of the cost, while ignoring the lesser games. WoW was not cheap from a purchase price or monthly fee perspective when it was released.

[Eon]

The job of a games developer is to produce a commercially successful title for the owners / shareholders. That's it.

In order to be commercially successful, people want more and / or better content for their dollar. That's just a fact - look at what games sell and what games don't.

It's not just "bigger" games that increase the amount of content you have to develop. A 20,000 polygon car just takes longer to build than a 5,000 polygon car. If you double the texture resolution then your artists are creating twice as many textures. It goes on and on.

And at the end of the day, it's like an arms race. Is it any surprise that the smaller publishers have vanished? This is because they could no longer match the development budgets of the larger houses - a single flop could kill them stone dead.

[RMan]

I guess it's unfortunate in a sense, but the reason the development costs continue to rise and the graphics keep getting better is because that's what sells.
As I’ve said before, no doubt all things being equal, the better looking game will be more attractive. Does mean we should make games cost 10 billion to make and have 1 game a year, everybody would be blissfully happy, right? Also, what primarily sells is what gets the greatest degree of marketing. The development costs are NOT rising as a result of a market change or demand, there is clearly no evidence of that. Seriously, you will find a FAR greater correlation between a game’s marketing and it success than it’s graphics. The recent rising costs of game development are the direct result of two major factors, the 360 a PS3, because that kind of art budget is required to make the games look that much better than current generation games, and because the largest developers can strengthen their IPs by making games all about the highest budgets (that’s always great for big companies). Anyone that thinks that these graphics are required, show me some evidence, any evidence besides the word of Microsoft or Sony that actually demonstrates this (better yet, look for it yourself, you don’t need to convince me of anything).
WoW is a really bad example if you're looking for a low-budget success story. And that's the reason that people play it: because it is better than everything else on the market.
It was not supposed to be a “low budget” success story, only one that refutes the idea that great graphics are a requirement for success (after all, it’s beating a bunch of games that look better). The Sims and Grand Theft Auto are also good examples of this. And I agree with you on the second point, people are playing it because it’s better (and because of marketing and a strong IP), not because it has great graphics. For every example of a game that seemed to be successful because of exceptional graphics, I can show you another success that was not exceptionally pretty, and in the end the real determining factor will likely be marketing.
The job of a games developer is to produce a commercially successful title for the owners / shareholders. That's it.
Well, we were talking in terms of making a game that people buy, but sure, in terms of their responsibility to their boss, yes, they’re supposed to make a profitable game.
And at the end of the day, it's like an arms race. Is it any surprise that the smaller publishers have vanished? This is because they could no longer match the development budgets of the larger houses - a single flop could kill them stone dead.
In reality, it’s way beyond that (although that’s clearly a big part, and the arms race example is a good one). Even if independents can make a great game, they can’t do the marketing, and will always get the short end of the stick in distribution. In the end, digital distribution will make a nice difference here, but that’s another discussion, and marketing/awareness will always be a problem.

[Achilles]

The job of a games developer is to produce a commercially successful title for the owners / shareholders. That's it.That's not true you know. There's a lot to be said for making a title that gets a really high review but doesn't sell. That'll raise the developer's credibility so publishers will feel more confident that, given the right marketing, their game can sell a truckload.

The goal of development studios is to get either a critically acclaimed game, or an acclaimed game that sells well. A game that's a critical failure that sells well is damaging to the company's reputation. Even if a lot of people buy your game, if they all come away thinking that the people who made it are untalented, that's not good. A company can survive on games like those but it'll never thrive.

About expense; you can make an expensive game that looks good, or you can make a smartly made game that’s not expensive and still looks good. It’s all about how you put it together. If you’re going for scope your game’s going to be expensive, but first out of the gate why are you going for scope? If the first game of a new development house is a 10+ million dollar title positioning itself against the best the genre has to offer than it deserves what it gets, which will probably be to fail.

[RMan]

About expense; you can make an expensive game that looks good, or you can make a smartly made game that’s not expensive and still looks good.
Bravo, couldn't agree more (with the whole post).