84 replies to this topic

[∑-sigma-]

Personally, I don't see much of a problem with this, as someone's states previously, it's a business after all, everyone wants more money, money makes the world go around.

I'd do the same thing in their shoes, not sure about other people though, if you don't like it, buy less games, work more, get a better job, get more money, or stop bitching. One thing that always ticks me is how people will spend so much of their time complaining about an issue instead of putting that effort into something more productive.

But then again, I live in Australia, where a new Xbox 360 game is about $100 to $120, pre-owned it's only about $5-$20 cheaper than getting it brand new, unless it's about 2-3 years old. With conversions:

Brand new game;
$100 AUD => $103 USD
$120 AUD => $124 USD
$90 AUD => $93 USD

AUS Skyrim.
USA Skyrim.

AUS: $99 AUD => $102 USD.
USA: 60 USD => $58 AUD.

We already pay an arm and a leg down here, this'll barely effect us at all.

[Defeatist Elitist]

This is (part of) the reason I'm going to remain a PC gamer. When they do this shit, it's way easier to get around.

But honestly, the last games I bought were like 2 humble indie bundles, a bunch of Paradox games, StarCraft 2 and Armored Core 5, and that's covering a year and a half or so, so it hardly mattered in the first place. A lot of great games are free.

[CrashGordon94]

Personally, I don't see much of a problem with this, as someone's states previously, it's a business after all, everyone wants more money, money makes the world go around.

That doesn't excuse being an asshole. There is such as thing as having ethics.

[Othin]

Personally, I don't see much of a problem with this, as someone's states previously, it's a business after all, everyone wants more money, money makes the world go around.

Making a product much more of an issue for consumers to use, to the point of harming sales, is not good business.

[SlayerX]

That doesn't excuse being an asshole. There is such as thing as having ethics.

As much as i'd like to agree with you, ethics don't seem to exist in the business world. All they care is to get money at all costs. Even if it means trampling their own customers.

Also, on the thing about not being able to play used game: That sucks. Oh yay, now we can't lend games and exchange. We must buy new video games at like 600$ a pop to buy one. :/ Fuck that shit.

Edited by SlayerX, 31 March 2012 - 10:25 AM.

[Tangerine]

To people complaining about them being "unfair": Where are you when game shops are being allowed to sell developers' games as their own? There have been stories about shops removing the packaging and marketing the game as used at a reduced price so they keep all the profit. Is that not unfair to the developers, who put all the time and work into MAKING the games that you do nothing but play and enjoy? Is it any surprise that Sony (and now Microsoft) are doing their best to keep the developers happy?

I mean developers are largely unhappy with used game sales because they do not make any profit off the sale of their games. The above example of what some stores have been doing is illegal, but used game sales themselves aren't. In the end it's the developers who are putting all of the work into this, and if they want to benefit from their game being sold then who are we to say no?

Here's the thing with Sony's system (as I agree that a complete lockout may be a bit much, so I do not entirely support Microsoft's atm): you can STILL buy used games, you just have to pay a fee after buying it to get it to work as if it were the full game. Depending on this fee, you could still buy the game for significantly cheaper than if it were new. The only difference is the developers are still getting your money in some form, and you have to pay a little bit extra than before. This largely depends on how much they decide to charge for their fee, but I wouldn't expect it to be any more than a digital title might cost you ($3-10).

So you might have to pay a little bit of extra money to support the developer whose game you are playing. Big deal? No, not really. I think this system, or something similar, is the way to go in the future to keep all parties happy. Look at the BS Capcom is pulling off. They are talking about only allowing ONE save file in their games in order to combat used game sales. You can only play the game once. You can't reset the save file, you just get to play the game once and then it's over. Capcom is an enormous company in the gaming industry, not some backwoods one doing this. Would you rather developers be doing things like that? Because they're going to. I'd rather pay 5 bucks or something extra for a game I can do whatever I want with than have to buy a new game for a second playthrough.

This is not going to kill gaming. PlayStation is the #11 overall brand in the world on Facebook, that says a lot about their teen and young adult fanbase. Xbox is #19 and Nintendo is not in the top 20. Even if overall sales are lower next generation at the start, they will improve. And it will still be a generation full of good games that people are going to want to buy.

Edited by Tangerine, 31 March 2012 - 01:31 PM.

[Ike-Mike]

Personally, I don't see much of a problem with this, as someone's states previously, it's a business after all, everyone wants more money, money makes the world go around.

Business is not about money.
Business is all about customers.
With practices like this they're pissing customers off.

One thing that always ticks me is how people will spend so much of their time complaining about an issue instead of putting that effort into something more productive.

So how often have you been donating to charity recently then?

As much as i'd like to agree with you, ethics don't seem to exist in the business world.

You need to be open to new contacts and be very knowledeable about people to succeed in business.

[shadowofchaos]

In fact, if this even comes CLOSE to fruitition I think a full-on boycott is in order!

They're eventually going to do this. A few people will complain, but most of their customers won't even care and most complainers will end up forking over money anyway as well. That's just how it has always been.

History, Crash. The business world isn't as silly as the crap in your sig.

That doesn't excuse being an asshole. There is such as thing as having ethics.

Despite them "caring" about their costumers and their money, they're ONLY concerned about customer satisfaction if it's only significant enough that it'll damage them...

As in, if it warrants some sort of "offering" to appease the rage... like during the 3DS price drop... the "Ambassador program"... that pacified enough people that they didn't ragequit.

[Blademaster!]

This is (part of) the reason I'm going to remain a PC gamer.

Don't PC gamers already have to put up with this already (outside of being able to just pirate stuff)? Last I checked there is no used game market for pc games.

Maybe if they kill the used game market will start to see less ldc content everywhere.

[OldMan]

Don't PC gamers already have to put up with this already (outside of being able to just pirate stuff)? Last I checked there is no used game market for pc games.

Installing games on new PCs, etc.

Maybe if they kill the used game market will start to see less ldc content everywhere.

Hahaha

Edited by TheEnd, 31 March 2012 - 05:11 PM.

[Tangerine]

Under Sony's system I imagine there would be some reduction of DLC at least first-party wise (but don't count on much). But under Microsoft's it depends. If less people are buying games then DLC may not even change (it might even increase) so they can make up the loss on people who do buy them.

Edited by Tangerine, 31 March 2012 - 05:12 PM.

[Rehab]

To people complaining about them being "unfair": Where are you when game shops are being allowed to sell developers' games as their own? There have been stories about shops removing the packaging and marketing the game as used at a reduced price so they keep all the profit. Is that not unfair to the developers, who put all the time and work into MAKING the games that you do nothing but play and enjoy? Is it any surprise that Sony (and now Microsoft) are doing their best to keep the developers happy?

I mean developers are largely unhappy with used game sales because they do not make any profit off the sale of their games. The above example of what some stores have been doing is illegal, but used game sales themselves aren't. In the end it's the developers who are putting all of the work into this, and if they want to benefit from their game being sold then who are we to say no?

Here's the thing with Sony's system (as I agree that a complete lockout may be a bit much, so I do not entirely support Microsoft's atm): you can STILL buy used games, you just have to pay a fee after buying it to get it to work as if it were the full game. Depending on this fee, you could still buy the game for significantly cheaper than if it were new. The only difference is the developers are still getting your money in some form, and you have to pay a little bit extra than before. This largely depends on how much they decide to charge for their fee, but I wouldn't expect it to be any more than a digital title might cost you ($3-10).

So you might have to pay a little bit of extra money to support the developer whose game you are playing. Big deal? No, not really. I think this system, or something similar, is the way to go in the future to keep all parties happy. Look at the BS Capcom is pulling off. They are talking about only allowing ONE save file in their games in order to combat used game sales. You can only play the game once. You can't reset the save file, you just get to play the game once and then it's over. Capcom is an enormous company in the gaming industry, not some backwoods one doing this. Would you rather developers be doing things like that? Because they're going to. I'd rather pay 5 bucks or something extra for a game I can do whatever I want with than have to buy a new game for a second playthrough.

This is not going to kill gaming. PlayStation is the #11 overall brand in the world on Facebook, that says a lot about their teen and young adult fanbase. Xbox is #19 and Nintendo is not in the top 20. Even if overall sales are lower next generation at the start, they will improve. And it will still be a generation full of good games that people are going to want to buy.

I buy my games new when the product supply gives me a choice, but I think the option to buy and sell used games is worth defending, and I find your thoughts on it somewhat hard to understand at points. Dressing up games as used, though something I haven't personally heard of, is patently ridiculous, but all I see there is some dumb retailers doing scummy things which I doubt they'd get away with in any business.

Who we are to say no, is people who pay for ownership of our copy of a game, which, as with cars, music or books, we should be able to use however we please. And I think that saying the developers don't benefit at all from people buying a used copy of their game neglects that a kind of word of mouth has been spread, and that the person could be more likely to buy another of that developer's games later.


Then there are plenty of games out there that simply don't have new copies being distributed any more. Without a used game market, I probably would have had a much harder time picking up Shadow of the Colossus in 2011, and I wouldn't have been hyped for the SotC/Ico bundle.


And that Capcom SINGLE FILE END OF LINE is haha wow the worst solution to anything ever. If (powers that be forbid) that becomes widespread, I wouldn't buy a game with it unless it takes a major price drop. Buying a game would become the equivalent of a trip to the theater.

[∑-sigma-]

Business is not about money.
Business is all about customers.
With practices like this they're pissing customers off.

No, business is indeed about money, it's about getting money, and getting more money. Customers are there to provide the money, giving it to the business in return for products or services.

Yeah, sure, without the customers, the business wouldn't get any money, but think about this logically, used game sales don't profit the business at all, if anything, it hinders and decreases the profit of the gaming businesses, of course they'd want to implement something like this.

So how often have you been donating to charity recently then?

I don't, because I don't care. You're point is ridiculous, considering I haven't been putting any effort at all into anything related to charity, nor would I want to. *shrug*

You need to be open to new contacts and be very knowledeable about people to succeed in business.

Knowledgeable. Knowledgeable. Knowledgeable.
I don't recall that ever meaning you had to care, nor does it mean you have to care more about the feelings of a minority within the gaming world that can't afford to buy a brand new game, more than the success of your own business. Besides, I'm pretty sure if Sony and Microsoft were to implement this, they would have thought it through immensely, they're not stupid y'know.

[Rehab]

Even if they do hinder it (and the net value of it seems to me like a difficult thing to calculate, compensating for word of mouth), it is often, or at the very least has been in many cases, literally unavoidable. People don't necessarily keep shipping out infinite new copies of games, so once those run out, even if you would have bought the special limited preorder shut-up-and-take-my-money edition if you had known it existed, you would be forced to settle for the copy of somebody who, in their infinite benevolence, put it on amazon for 20 bucks.

There's digital distribution, but man, how the hell else am I going to get Ouendan years after fact?

[Blademaster!]

Installing games on new PCs, etc.

You lost me. What exactly are you trying to say here?

[Tangerine]

I buy my games new when the product supply gives me a choice, but I think the option to buy and sell used games is worth defending, and I find your thoughts on it somewhat hard to understand at points.

That option is still there. Sony's system allows for the play of used games on any console, for a small additional fee that you can pay at any time through PSN, from what I have read. There is nothing hard to understand about what I said.

Who we are to say no, is people who pay for ownership of our copy of a game, which, as with cars, music or books, we should be able to use however we please. And I think that saying the developers don't benefit at all from people buying a used copy of their game neglects that a kind of word of mouth has been spread, and that the person could be more likely to buy another of that developer's games later.

You can do whatever you please with it still. The developers will profit off of all sales of their games with this system, not just new copies.

Then there are plenty of games out there that simply don't have new copies being distributed any more. Without a used game market, I probably would have had a much harder time picking up Shadow of the Colossus in 2011, and I wouldn't have been hyped for the SotC/Ico bundle.

I can't believe how blown out of proportion you are making this. There is not going to be a used game market now? Maybe not for the new Xbox, but there will be for the new PlayStation and the new Nintendo console.

And that Capcom SINGLE FILE END OF LINE is haha wow the worst solution to anything ever. If (powers that be forbid) that becomes widespread, I wouldn't buy a game with it unless it takes a major price drop. Buying a game would become the equivalent of a trip to the theater.

And if that doesn't prove how desperate developers are to combat the used game market, I don't know what does. This new system is significantly better than letting developers do ridiculous stuff like that. Developers likely pressured the console manufacturers into doing something about it.

Edited by Tangerine, 31 March 2012 - 07:39 PM.

[∑-sigma-]

Even if they do hinder it (and the net value of it seems to me like a difficult thing to calculate, compensating for word of mouth), it is often, or at the very least has been in many cases, literally unavoidable. People don't necessarily keep shipping out infinite new copies of games, so once those run out, even if you would have bought the special limited preorder shut-up-and-take-my-money edition if you had known it existed, you would be forced to settle for the copy of somebody who, in their infinite benevolence, put it on amazon for 20 bucks.

There's digital distribution, but man, how the hell else am I going to get Ouendan years after fact?

If you miss out, you miss out.
If a game is years old, and only costs about %10 of the original price, then I can understand how implementing this idea would suck major balls, but the focus of this is as it's been stated previously, pre-owned games that aren't years old, maintaining an incredibly close price to the new retail price with all the profit going to the store, instead of the developer. From what I've been led to believe, Developers get nothing on pre-owned games, even if this system has draw backs, sometimes you have to rid yourself of a few things to get to your desirable destination.

Sometimes, you have to get rid of things to survive, it's just the way things go. *shrug*

[OldMan]

You lost me. What exactly are you trying to say here?

When PC game makers try putting dumb restrictions - like keeping you from installing a game more than thrice - cracks pop up in the internet within a day. However, it isn't that easy with console games.

It's true there's no used PC game market, though. The issues are different.

[Othin]

Most of the furniture in my family's house, we received in a used condition. We did not buy most of it new; we received it largely as gifts from relatives who had used it already. Because we did not buy the furniture, we did not benefit the people who made the product by means of paying them to purchase it. Should the furniture companies seek to block this transaction? Should they add devices to the furniture they make that would force the customers to register the furniture with their household, and if the furniture was taken out of that household, it would collapse into an unusable form or fall apart?

Would that not be insane? Would that not be suicide as a business?

[Celice]

You're talking about objects which have real tangible, degradable features. Not an arrangement of data people price artificially.