http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=261330

Since they can't blame their financial problems on piracy anymore, the Video Game industry is now targeting purchasers of pre-owned games. From what I've read, used game sales can arguably hurt developers even more than piracy, because people who buy used were already planning to spend money on the game, whereas pirates were not. Now you can say what you want about the ethics, or lack thereof, of piracy, but buying pre-owned stuff can't be considered wrong by any stretch of the imagination, and I find it grossly offensive to penalize that. If this is really the source of their financial woes, they need to suck it up and just die. That's what's supposed to happen when you fail to sell a product. Just my opinion though. What do y'all think?

Blaming low sales on used games is stupid think of it this way.

how do used games get resold?

because the previous owners did not want it!

You are still getting the sale! Person to person thats one sale!

one game.

all this means is that the game you originally sold is now getting used is it better that they buy it and never play it?

If a game developer thinks there game getting used is worse then buying 2 copys and one getting wasted then I do not think its worth complaining about because your users will think your stupid.

another way: Used games help video game stores.

@Dshiznit Yes if some one no longer wants your game then it must fail. It is completely the Video game developers fault do not fall into believing this shit.

btw THQ wrestling games suck true fail to its fullest even read the comments under the article.

Can't wait for games to start using one-time license keys that can't be carried over to second-hand sales. Some MMORPGs already do it.

Oh, would you look at that, more greedy adults trying everything to get their money/ way. What are the odds?

That's horrendously dumb; what's even the mechanism for that?

One example I can think of is Final Fantasy XI. I believe the game's CD-key is somehow tied to the player's credit card, or other personal information. You can't resale the game because this license is non-transferable. This could be something they changed at some point, but I'm not sure.

Wow, that's beyond sleazy. Then do they force you to re-enter your CC info every time you start a new game or something? I hope that doesn't become a more widespread practice, although it probably will.

There is some merit to the complaints. With physical goods (cars, electronics, whatever), the original warranty is non transferable and expires, so something unique to the first owner is a normal practice for most goods, it just isn't for software. Adding that to software really isn't any different. Physical goods also degrade over time, software doesn't. When you buy a used car, for example, there are usually things "wrong" with it, in addition to normal wear and tear. That doesn't happen with games. It stays in perfect condition regardless of how much it has been played.

Used physical goods inherently have less value than new physical goods. Bringing that over to software isn't "greedy", it is allowing used markets to continue to function. Used markets don't work if the original never loses any value.

As long as they tell you *up front* what that loss of value will be (which they are), then it is perfectly acceptable. Heck, still a *lot* better than hit or miss used goods with physical objects.



No it isn't. Have you never played an MMO? They have monthly fees - there isn't a used market in the first place because the upfront cost of the game is negligible anyway.

Ah, of course, obviously I've never played a true persistent MMO other than Blockland, as much as it qualifies as part of that category.

Except that in most places you're guaranteed a 90-day warranty on software...

It's the comparison to, and resultant treatment as, piracy that has me and a lot of people raging. If people get treated like pirates for buying games used, they'll just be more inclined to mod their consoles and pirate their games. What would you rather have, the establishments that sell your games get patronized, or more widespread piracy?

Software doesn't "break" in the same sense that a physical good breaks. That 90-day warranty only covers the physical medium, anyway. Software also generally gets free patches - physical goods are almost never fixed for free.



They aren't being treated like pirates - they are getting less product for less money, same as every other used market. And it is also made clear upfront before the initial purchase.

Game developers also don't care if GameStop makes more money or if ThePirateBay sees more traffic, they couldn't care less because they don't get any money in either case.

When GameStop makes money, they buy more of a given developer's games, conversely, when The Pirate Bay gets more traffic, that same developer ends up selling less games(according to your own logic from the piratism topic). Developers should prefer that Gamestop distribute their games pre-owned, instead of the Pirate Bay. When Developers like THQ say in a press release that people who buy used games are as bad as pirates(which is what I started this topic with), it drives those people(including me) to piracy. It's not merely the garnishing of features for secondhand users that has everyone pissed, it's the comparison THQ and others have made between those users and criminals.

No they don't. The used games are pure profits for GameStop - the developers don't benefit from that at all, neither directly nor indirectly. In fact, they lost a *paying* customer to the used game, hence why they said used game buyers are as bad as pirates. They are, from a developer perspective, WORSE than pirates, because you have someone willing to pay for a game, but not to pay the developers for the game.

The rest of your stuff is invalid since you started with the above false assumption.

Last time I checked, you need money(e.g. profits) in order to buy something, thus the more money Gamestop earns, the more they can invest in new buying new games. You've said this yourself.

It doesn't work this way, the money they make goes right into their accounts to be used for other expences, not many people realize how much it actually costs to run a business.

(1) Rent (2) Rent (3) Rent (at least in NYC) (4) Employee wages (5) Inventory (6) Advertising (7) Maintenance and utilities ( Health care ....

That doesn't make any sense. Think that through. Why would buying a USED game cause Gamestop to buy more NEW games? Answer: It doesn't. Gamestop only buys new games when it sells new games. They don't invest in games.

Now, the original seller of the used game MIGHT use that money to buy new games, but they might not. Either way, a used product having less value than a new one is natural and expected.

Also, Gamestop doesn't use profits to buy games - as the money spent on games is no longer profits. Profits are what is left over AFTER expenses

Do they not put that money right back into business? The more money GameStop makes, the more they can expand(once they've covered other expenses), allowing them to purchase more new games to sell. Helping Game stores ultimately helps the people making the games they're selling.

Not necessarily. Gamestop is a for *PROFIT* company. Their goal is to make money, not break even.



Only true if Gamestop was the only place to buy new games, but they aren't. Gamestop making money and then encroaching on markets covered by BestBuy or Walmart or whoever doesn't help developers. More Gamestops does not mean more new games sold - not at all.

So they just horde all the profits in a big vault and do nothing with it? Get real. Businesses use their profits to expand and grow over time. This is why there are Starbucks' and Wal-Marts everywhere. As GameStop(or EBGames, or any other chain that deals in used games) makes money over time, some of their savings go right back in to expanding stores, or buying new locations, both of which result in larger inventories.


I think you do have a point here. I hadn't considered them encroaching on other markets, but I can definitely see how that would be a problem if that is the case. Then again, Wal-Mart and Best Buy also both make money on a lot more than just games, so it might not be much of an issue, unless they give up on selling games. Not sure I see this happening.